Replacement Vizio with new menus that have CMS - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 26 Old 02-15-2014, 11:14 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
jjthenovice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Antelope, CA
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I’ve just received by replacement tv (E701i-A3) from Vizio. It has a new added feature (CMS). Under this menu it provides for an 11pt greyscale calibration. It starts at 5% and then goes to 100% by 10’s. For each point there is an adjustment for red, green and blue. Under this menu there is also a color tuner. This has red, green, blue, cyan, magenta and yellow. Each color has settings for hue, saturation and brightness. The red, green and blue have an additional adjustment for offset and gain. If I were doing a 2pt greyscale calibration I guess I would use just the color tune and the gain and offset. However if I use the 11pt option do I need to use the offset and gain found under the color tuner? Maybe a better question is how to use the offset and gain?
Regards
JJ
jjthenovice is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 26 Old 02-16-2014, 12:22 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
Hi,

Do you have calibration equipment? Software and meters?
Wouter73 is offline  
post #3 of 26 Old 02-16-2014, 12:45 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
jjthenovice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Antelope, CA
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Yes I have an Eye-One with the necessary disc.
jjthenovice is offline  
post #4 of 26 Old 02-16-2014, 04:21 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
Your questions are valid but too complicated to explain on a forum. You will need to read a bit on the subjectmatter. This article is very good at explaining the basics:
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10457
Wouter73 is offline  
post #5 of 26 Old 02-16-2014, 10:17 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
jjthenovice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Antelope, CA
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wouter73 View Post

Your questions are valid but too complicated to explain on a forum. You will need to read a bit on the subjectmatter. This article is very good at explaining the basics:
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10457
Thank you. I've read Kal. I've used this in the past to calibrate my old TV. What is confusing is the new TV has a 11pt greyscal cal and using it you can adjust the r,g,b each. The gain and offset are in the color tuner section separate from the 11pt section. If I'm understanding Kal article the gain and offset are used for a 2pt greyscale. If that's true do I first do a 2pt then 11pt. As i said in a 11pt I am adjusting the individual colors (r,g,b).
jjthenovice is offline  
post #6 of 26 Old 02-16-2014, 10:26 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
Ah ok I misunderstood, sorry.
I believe it depend on the tv you have. Some tv's allow you to do a "course" 2 point grayscale at for example 20% and 80%, and after that fine-tune with the 11-point grayscale controls. Others will allow you to use either the 2-point or the 11-point, but not on top of each other.

The way it works is the same. With 2 point (rob gain and rob offset) you use only a low level gray pattern (20% or 30%), with and a high level gray pattern (80%). With 11-point you have exactly the same controls, only 11 times, for grayscale pattern in 10% increments, 10%, 20%, 30% etc.
Wouter73 is offline  
post #7 of 26 Old 02-16-2014, 10:42 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
jjthenovice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Antelope, CA
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wouter73 View Post

Ah ok I misunderstood, sorry.
I believe it depend on the tv you have. Some tv's allow you to do a "course" 2 point grayscale at for example 20% and 80%, and after that fine-tune with the 11-point grayscale controls. Others will allow you to use either the 2-point or the 11-point, but not on top of each other.

The way it works is the same. With 2 point (rob gain and rob offset) you use only a low level gray pattern (20% or 30%), with and a high level gray pattern (80%). With 11-point you have exactly the same controls, only 11 times, for grayscale pattern in 10% increments, 10%, 20%, 30% etc.
So if I want to do a quick 2pt I would skip the 11pt menu and use the color tuner menu with the offset and gain. If I use the 11pt then I would'nt mess with the offset and gain found in the color tuner.
jjthenovice is offline  
post #8 of 26 Old 02-21-2014, 01:09 PM
Senior Member
 
dmoney94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just received the same TV, I have look everywhere for a good calibration settings.

Please can you post your final calibration settings when you done. .

Thanks!
dmoney94 is offline  
post #9 of 26 Old 02-22-2014, 07:36 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: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmoney94 View Post

Just received the same TV, I have look everywhere for a good calibration settings.

Please can you post your final calibration settings when you done. .

Thanks!

Here we go again... you can't copy settings and expect to get better results than random settings more than 4% of the time...not 40% of the time, 4% of the time. This is possibly one of the most asked questions on AVS and is also one of the questions novices get most pissed off about when they read the answer.

People have measured TVs with copied settings and random guesses at the right settings (from looking at test patterns and familiar images) done without instrumentation produce better overall results than copying settings from a calibrated sample of the same TV.

"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 26 Old 02-23-2014, 04:28 AM
Senior Member
 
dmoney94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

Here we go again... you can't copy settings and expect to get better results than random settings more than 4% of the time...not 40% of the time, 4% of the time. This is possibly one of the most asked questions on AVS and is also one of the questions novices get most pissed off about when they read the answer.

People have measured TVs with copied settings and random guesses at the right settings (from looking at test patterns and familiar images) done without instrumentation produce better overall results than copying settings from a calibrated sample of the same TV.

He is using a professional tool to calibrate his TV that's why I am asking him for his settings..

Does it still matter?
dmoney94 is offline  
post #11 of 26 Old 02-23-2014, 06:16 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
Did you read doug's reply? If you take 10 identical tv's and calibrate them using professional equipment you get 10 different sets of settings.

Someone else's settings will in 96%(!!!) of cases make your tv worse.

Why? Because all of the components in your tv have a tolerance of a few %. This tolerance in combination with the fact that there are thousands of components make each and every tv unique.
Wouter73 is offline  
post #12 of 26 Old 02-23-2014, 11:10 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: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 227
It doesn't matter who does the calibration... different samples of any given TV have different settings requirements.

Consumer TVs are not designed to be accurate... they use inexpensive electronic parts that all have tolerances... some tolerances are 20% variations in the nominal value of the component, while other components can have values that vary up to 40% from their stated value... a resistor, for example, might be labeled 1000 ohms, but it could have a value from 600 ohms to 1400 ohms. Depending on where that resistor is located in the TV it could have a large effect or no effect on calibration settings. Since there are hundreds, possibly thousands of components in a TV, you have 10s or 100s of thousands (or even millions) of possible combinations of tolerances leading to different settings requirements.

The reason professional monitors cost $10,000 to $30,000 is because they use components with TINY tolerances and every pro monitor is far more like every other pro monitor of the same model that you MIGHT get away with copying settings for casual viewing, but for pro work, they STILL calibrate each pro monitor separately.

"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 #13 of 26 Old 03-28-2014, 03:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
tombaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

Here we go again... you can't copy settings and expect to get better results than random settings more than 4% of the time...not 40% of the time, 4% of the time. This is possibly one of the most asked questions on AVS and is also one of the questions novices get most pissed off about when they read the answer.

People have measured TVs with copied settings and random guesses at the right settings (from looking at test patterns and familiar images) done without instrumentation produce better overall results than copying settings from a calibrated sample of the same TV.

1. I don't know Doug but when I read your response, it more of a there you go again. The OP asked for someone to post their calibrated results. If you have never calibrated a E701i-A3, you could just stop there, you don't have the knowledge or data to answer the question. But instead, you proclaim that his question is invalid, not worth an answer because of the mystical black art or using a sensor.

2. On the E701i-A3 owners thread someone named Chad, posts some very good results off his Calibrations of the E701i-A3, but when asked for the settings, others chimed in (not Chad) that he would never dare to post such things, as he has a business based on those very numbers. Well if it as you say, a set of calibration numbers can not be used across multiple TVs, why would Chad, or others, not dare to put out the numbers themselves? Why not? Its because the numbers will work significantly well, and with a modern LCD, with LED lighting, the variances between samples is getting smaller and smaller.

3. TVs are tuned for as an individual unit and locked into a given output vs a measured goal. Just like if you look at the service menu of a Dell LCD monitor, you can see the settings unique to that specific monitor, the offsets used. When you go into the main menu you can work off baseline the factory creates for each unit.

3. Talking about tolerances of the component parts, is becoming increasingly meaningless. You used to have a VGA monitor at high resolution, and you would want a high quality cable in order to run the monitor properly. With a DVI cable now, so long as you are not using one over 10 ft, and its a reasonable manufacturer.....any cable is as good as the next. The old need for a high quality VGA cable to run it well, is just gone. Someone can pretend that all digital hardware needs customized tuning like the same need of aligning projection bulbs, and convergences. But really nobody believes it.

4. THX tune-up is a fine alternative to punching in someone elses numbers......But unless you think that LED LCD coming off the line is radically different than the next unit off the same line. Punching in some numbers and taking a look is a pretty good solution. Having someone come out to your house to set up a home theater is one thing, having someone come out to just calibrate your TV to known standard's is overkill with you can punch in some numbers and be pretty close, and tweak on top of that.

Lets not agree on the need for professional calibration, or whether or not numbers from same TV can be shared. We know that people take a sensor, test, tweak and that write down these numbers, and charge people 100 dollars for them, don't want them posted, because they obviously won't work. You say they won't work also. Others, who calibrate as hobby, are more than willing to share numbers, on forums like this, because they understand a specific model and class have similarity and these setting are able to be shared an used.

The OP asked if someone would share their numbers for the newest revision of the E701i-A3, also know as the Q model.
If you never have calibrated these TVs, you can not help his question, If you have not tried the latest version, you can not answer his question. If you have calibrated his class of HDTV, and you are not willing to share the numbers, you are unable to answer the question, and unable to help, so don't reply. BUT PLEASE, don't go about telling the person looking for the information, that they are wrong to seek it, and it will be useless, because useless is a different thing than not profitable. Can we at least discuss it here on AVS, instead of being directed to go to CNET? How many times can a simple question be asked, without some TV calibrator businessman saying you can't do that?
YOU CAN, others may not want to, and end results MAY NOT BE PERFECT TOO, but it may be worthwhile to try.

If someone could answer the OP question, anyone have numbers they would like to share for a E701i-A3 the Q version with new menus for color management, the 2014 model
I would be interested in read it.
tombaker is offline  
post #14 of 26 Old 03-28-2014, 03:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 2,084
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 412
2. No, it is because numbers do NOT transfer universally. I do not want someone to put my numbers into their set, then when it is not a good match for them due to a difference in sample to sample variation, environment, and/or owner's taste, they would incorrectly assume they don't like a calibrated picture when in fact they never experienced a calibrated picture.

As a side note, some settings do transfer pretty universally from one sample to the next, and some settings do not. Example of a setting that normally does carry over is sharpness. If one sample needs a sharpness of 50, you can pretty much bet that all others of that model will need a sharpness of 50 assuming the same input type. Example of a setting that normally does not transfer would be white balance, both 2 point and especially 10 point. CMS is somewhere in between, because general trends are consistent from sample to sample yet actual numbers vary.
tombaker and PlasmaPZ80U like this.

ISF/THX calibrator, HDTVbyChadB
Jeti 1211

Latest reviews:
Sony 65X950BLG 65UB9800Samsung UN65HU8550UN65HU9000, UN85HU8550, LG 55EC9300
Chad B is offline  
post #15 of 26 Old 03-28-2014, 04:25 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: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 227
You need to educate yourself about a subject before taking a professional to task for an accurate post... accurate in EVERY POSSIBLE WAY.

Some people who share this very forum who were not professional calibrators as far as I know, have already tried calibrating a video display and copying those settings to other samples of the same display. Only 4% of the time did they obtain results that were equal to or better than the default results (using reasonable settings to begin with). That is fact, and that proves that you cannot copy settings between displays and achieve anything useful. Without a meter you would never know if the copied settings are better or not, but the great unwashed masses (even here on AVS there are under-informed users) are simply not capable of making ANY judgements about whether copied settings are better or not because most people will have a prejudice to THINK the copied settings are better even if they are proven worse by measurements after the fact. There aren't many PROFESSIONAL calibrators who can tell you if a video display is accurate or not (without measurements). The chances of someone without training or equipment being able to tell anything beyond gross errors is slim to none.

1- This is a "here we go again" reply because there is an endless stream of people posting similar requests/inquiries in the calibration thread who think like you do because they haven't educated themselves thoroughly on the subject.

2- Your premise is just plain wrong whether you believe that or not. You can remain ignorant on the topic if you wish, but don't go posting here that you know we are all wrong about this because we aren't wrong about it (copying settings being useful), you are.

3- You are delusional. TVs are not custom calibrated on a unit by unit basis. If they were, 10 samples of the same model would NEVER measure or look different when you take them out of the box, but they DO NOT match each other. And that is also a fact, just ask anyone who has to calibrate video walls so an array of 10 or 20 or 40 video displays all look the same. None of them match at the beginning of that sort of undertaking, not even if they are Pro monitors (though Pro monitors are a lot closer to each other than consumer models.... and they should be considering what Pro monitors sell for (because they use higher precision components and higher-precision circuits).

4- Once again this speculation all results from your un-scientific belief system that you have constructed without industry experience, without training in topic, and without calibration exoerience. You cannot say things like this just because you think they are true. You have no calibration experience so you think it's not particularly useful. Whatever. I feel like I'm carrying 50 lethal weapons and the combined super powers of the entire Justice Leagie and you're standing there with a rubber dagger and a baby chicken. It's not a fair fight, but you apparently don't realize it.

"Lets not agree on the need for professional calibration, or whether or not numbers from same TV can be shared. We know that people take a sensor, test, tweak and that write down these numbers, and charge people 100 dollars for them, don't want them posted, because they obviously won't work. You say they won't work also. Others, who calibrate as hobby, are more than willing to share numbers, on forums like this, because they understand a specific model and class have similarity and these setting are able to be shared an used."

That is one of the worst arguments I've ever heard or read on this topic. Somebody with unconfirmed calibration skills posts numbers others can use so THEY are right, But people educated on the topic who KNOW you can't share settings because it just doesn't work more than 4% of the time (which is PROVEN by the way and possibly right here on AVS) are just trying to protect their turf. Yeah, right. Just another conspiracy hypothesis (there are almost ZERO conspiracy theories, they are 99,99% hypotheses, and there is a very important distinction between theory and hypothesis... a theory explains something real, something true, a hypothesis is essentially an unproven guess, though an astronomer hypothesizing about the origin of the universe isn't on the same level as someone with no education in physics or astronomy claiming astrology is real. Astrology and copied video display settings are about equally real.

"BUT PLEASE, don't go about telling the person looking for the information, that they are wrong to seek it, and it will be useless, because useless is a different thing than not profitable."

This "place" is know as AVS Forums... AVS stands for Audio (&) Video SCIENCE, not Audio Video SPECULATION. And SCIENCE tells us copying settings is not effective and is ESPECIALLY NOT a subject for the calibration thread on AVS because copying settings is not calibration.... not even remotely close to calibration. You are presenting speculation as fact, and you are wrong. We know what the facts are from our own training and experience wth 100s if not 1000s of video displays. I can't even estimate how many different displays I've woked with over the last 10 years or so (I've been involved in imageing systems professionally since 1972 and have been deep into both analog and digital video systems including digital cinema related products for all of that time. As much as digital video eliminates things that were problems in the analog video age,digital imaging in the form of consumer video displays is not an exact science. And video calibration is part science and part art... the art being figuring out how t best hide errors when a TV won't calibrate as well as you'd like and/or how to manipulate the controls in the display when the controls don't work quite right.

"If someone could answer the OP question, anyone have numbers they would like to share for a E701i-A3 the Q version with new menus for color management, the 2014 model
I would be interested in read it."

Then go start a "sharing TV calibration settings" thread. That is not a question to ask in a calibration thread because it has nothing to do with calibration. In fact, it is a patently ignorant question to ask in a calibration thread where everybody to checks in here regularly wants to do nothing more than help people understand calibration, calibration issues, and to answer calibration related questions. I'm going to make the astrology thing an issue again because your position on copying settings is very similar to the opinion of someone who believes in astrology. Quite a few debunking exercises have been done on astrology over the decades, perhaps over the centuries. One of the more clever ones I read about studied a fairly large number of subjects, like well over 100 people. For 3 months they each received their horoscope for their particular "sign" and they were asked record before retiring for the evening how often the horoscope accurately related to what happened to them that day on a 1-5 scale. The test went on for 6 months, but the participants were not told that after the first 3 months, the team performing the study took the horoscopes from the same source and randomly mixed them up so someone who was a "Cancer" could receive the horoscope for a "Pisces" one day, while the next day they might receive a horoscope for a Gemini... just a complete random sample of horoscopes. They then compared results from the first 3 months to results for the second 3 months and there was no difference. Most of the people who participated in the study shrugged it off and kept believing that their horoscope was somehow "real". This is exactly the sort of situation you are in here. You're not likely to find much sympathy for your point of view here.... everybody is entitled to their opinion even if it is wrong. But presenting it as CORRECT when it is NOT... that's what we have a problem with.

"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 #16 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 04:05 AM
Advanced Member
 
tombaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad B View Post

2. No, it is because numbers do NOT transfer universally. I do not want someone to put my numbers into their set, then when it is not a good match for them due to a difference in sample to sample variation, environment, and/or owner's taste, they would incorrectly assume they don't like a calibrated picture when in fact they never experienced a calibrated picture.

As a side note, some settings do transfer pretty universally from one sample to the next, and some settings do not. Example of a setting that normally does carry over is sharpness. If one sample needs a sharpness of 50, you can pretty much bet that all others of that model will need a sharpness of 50 assuming the same input type. Example of a setting that normally does not transfer would be white balance, both 2 point and especially 10 point. CMS is somewhere in between, because general trends are consistent from sample to sample yet actual numbers vary.

I first want to thank you for your contributing your finalized report on the E701i-A3 after your worked it for a client. I hope I was clear that others were saying you would never post the numbers, that they felt it would be a problem. I read this thread after the other, and saw how the question was treated, I hope you understand my response was only to how the question was treated by others.
I understand why you would not mark your numbers out as a definition of numbers, when you do work with clients. Personal tastes is a big thing. For something like black level, some will want the darker look, even if they lose shadow detail, other won't....Lots of tradefoffs, and if someone is paying for tuning their 3000+ home theater, its all about what THEY want.

I think that generic calibrations for specific sets, can get you into the right city as in directions from Los Angeles into San Francisco. Not the address and street, or even the neighborhood, but the city. And there are lots of places in SF you don't want to be be left in. The posting I saw of yours was very helpful because it said how well it could be done, by a professional. The numbers from a technical calibration can be useful to insert and tinker with. In the case of this threat, the OP has hardware to work with, and was asking if there were some numbers that have been put out there. The CNET ones not being a match to the newer models. Again, I definitely appreciated you sharing the file report you posted.
tombaker is offline  
post #17 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 05:05 AM
Senior Member
 
praz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Too bad all these posts that are continually made in this section of the forum requesting calibration settings are not immediately deleted.
praz is offline  
post #18 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 06:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
tombaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

You need to educate yourself about a subject before taking a professional to task for an accurate post... accurate in EVERY POSSIBLE WAY.

Some people who share this very forum who were not professional calibrators as far as I know, have already tried calibrating a video display and copying those settings to other samples of the same display. Only 4% of the time did they obtain results that were equal to or better than the default results (using reasonable settings to begin with).That is fact, and that proves that you cannot copy settings between displays and achieve anything useful.
Where do you come up with your 4% FACT. Honestly you just pull that out of think air, and proclaim it to be a FACT that proves your point. What was the survey size to make your fact? Where they apple to apple, same model, AND same model and panel manufacturer (you understand that difference), were they using Plasmas, and how aged were the Plasmas. Maybe you are talking projectors. Its no FACT, and expect better of the reader.
Quote:
Without a meter you would never know if the copied settings are better or not, but the great unwashed masses (even here on AVS there are under-informed users) are simply not capable of making ANY judgements about whether copied settings are better or not because most people will have a prejudice to THINK the copied settings are better even if they are proven worse by measurements after the fact.
LOL, you really think that? Let me check something.....yup my eyes are a meter. Thanks for posting this techobabble, because it confirms my frustration with your first posting. You are professing that people can not See (ie subjectively measure) a HDTV image, and then make ANY judgement of whether it is better or not....and going further you think the power of suggestion is enough for them to think incorrectly also. Funny stuff indeed. In the end, it is better if the end user thinks it is, the customer or end user. For someone to think that a person wanting or paying for color calibrated HDTV can not be "the judge of it" is amazing. Take this color, my sensor says you must! you are basically at that. BTW I am not talking about soft-proofing for print, where definitions of color are transferred between a monitor, to a printing device, those will be hard numbers, we are talking a person and their AV system.
Quote:
There aren't many PROFESSIONAL calibrators who can tell you if a video display is accurate or not (without measurements). The chances of someone without training or equipment being able to tell anything beyond gross errors is slim to none.
So if I bring my known source material on a Blue Ray, and run it through several different setups, I can not tell if I think they are good or not. Wait, I can, and that is not using measuring equipment. The ideal of a number beyond the subjective viewer remains laughable.
Quote:
1- This is a "here we go again" reply because there is an endless stream of people posting similar requests/inquiries in the calibration thread who think like you do because they haven't educated themselves thoroughly on the subject.
This thread is pretty specific, a guy with equipment looking to use it on his TV, fine, and another guy who says, Great to see, tell me your numbers when you get it done. THEN You. Who chastises they guy asking for numbers, and thinks that those numbers would be useless. (Whether or not you sell services does not really play into it at all)
So you are wrong, the numbers will help people, that is why they asked, others are interested, Me for example, and then there is you, trying to stamp down the discussion, stop the exchange of information on the forum, selling whatever. Its simple, if you don't want to answer the question, Don't, but Don't tell the guy he should not ask. And if you are wondering what your reply should have been.....it should have been nothing, read your next thread, move off. Instead you post stuff that is just wrong. What is wrong, that a viewer can not tell IF THEY like an image better or not.

Quote:
2- Your premise is just plain wrong whether you believe that or not. You can remain ignorant on the topic if you wish, but don't go posting here that you know we are all wrong about this because we aren't wrong about it (copying settings being useful), you are.
So I am wrong of what? You don't bother to say. Copying the settings from a person who used their own hardware to calibrate their own TV, which is identical to your own, IS USEFUL TO SOME. I know you want to sell a 400 dollar personal visit calibration of a HDTV. Fine, more power to those that can afford it, and want it, and need it. But you go way to far when you DECLARE that how others not paying for your services, should discuss and talk about how they are handling the color of their sets. The set in question is a 1500 70inch LED, LCD, with system on a chip designs, and a powersupply. Sorry but there is value in discussing means of adjusting the set WITHOUT paying someone 400 dollars to read a X-Rite. Especially someone who has all the understanding of, ITS WHAT MY MACHINE SAYS, there you go, I am not able to judge without my machine, neither are you, cash or check.

Quote:
3- You are delusional. TVs are not custom calibrated on a unit by unit basis. If they were, 10 samples of the same model would NEVER measure or look different when you take them out of the box, but they DO NOT match each other. And that is also a fact, just ask anyone who has to calibrate video walls so an array of 10 or 20 or 40 video displays all look the same. None of them match at the beginning of that sort of undertaking, not even if they are Pro monitors (though Pro monitors are a lot closer to each other than consumer models.... and they should be considering what Pro monitors sell for (because they use higher precision components and higher-precision circuits).

The panels and have a definition that is unique to it, after it is defined, it brings the panel to a base point, the generic factory setting (not inside the service menu) on top of an equalized panel. Take two identical Dell PVA montiors, look inside the service menus, and you will numbers set by the factory unique to the panel inside that unit. Start messing with those numbers and you can get lost forever. Lacie monitors, you should be aware of them, cherry picks panels from NEC, and then puts high bit LUTs on them. Sure for consumer level HDTV they put a jig of sensors over the panel, do a quick set, and move on....but its still done. DO YOU honestly think that every single LCD panel, uses the exact same user control numbers, and that is the factory setting? Are you old enough to understand the word potentiometer, you know those things inside the CRTs which you would set, even when the color was controlled with a digital display.

But on his specific Vizio even if you don't believe all of that, they do have a setting called Calibrated Color, what do you think that is? This is new to the Q model, which has all the new nifty feature, which is the topic of this thread.
Quote:
4- Once again this speculation all results from your un-scientific belief system that you have constructed without industry experience, without training in topic, and without calibration exoerience. You cannot say things like this just because you think they are true. You have no calibration experience so you think it's not particularly useful. Whatever. I feel like I'm carrying 50 lethal weapons and the combined super powers of the entire Justice Leagie and you're standing there with a rubber dagger and a baby chicken. It's not a fair fight, but you apparently don't realize it.

You don't know what my experience is in manufacturing but you do want to profess what you think it is. You can take a wafer of chips, hook up a sensor from AMD, and test the chips on the wafer before cutting the die, that type of automation is used in Korea in the LCD lines too. My trusty DTP94 disagrees with thoughts about me also. If you have a windows 7 driver that is not based on the B model still offered by made by Datacolor, I would be interested. I am not charging people 400 dollars a head to be a monkey with a meter speaking as if I were the hollowed robes of the clergy of the calibration either.
Quote:
"Lets not agree on the need for professional calibration, or whether or not numbers from same TV can be shared. We know that people take a sensor, test, tweak and that write down these numbers, and charge people 100 dollars for them, don't want them posted, because they obviously won't work. You say they won't work also. Others, who calibrate as hobby, are more than willing to share numbers, on forums like this, because they understand a specific model and class have similarity and these setting are able to be shared an used."

That is one of the worst arguments I've ever heard or read on this topic. Somebody with unconfirmed calibration skills posts numbers others can use so THEY are right, But people educated on the topic who KNOW you can't share settings because it just doesn't work more than 4% of the time (which is PROVEN by the way and possibly right here on AVS) are just trying to protect their turf. Yeah, right. Just another conspiracy hypothesis (there are almost ZERO conspiracy theories, they are 99,99% hypotheses, and there is a very important distinction between theory and hypothesis... a theory explains something real, something true, a hypothesis is essentially an unproven guess, though an astronomer hypothesizing about the origin of the universe isn't on the same level as someone with no education in physics or astronomy claiming astrology is real. Astrology and copied video display settings are about equally real.

Bottle taking for you or what not, I think an automated flame generator has more flare. Your 4% proven, statement does not even pass the statistical error of a sample at that size, even if controlled and still applicable to current technologies and manufacturing.

Your Hall of Justice stuff, is pretty much why I replied, beyond my interest in this actual set. If you don't think a set of numbers is useful, and you are sick of reading posts, just move along, read your next post, let other people share information in this forum as they feel fit. Vizio will be out with there next generation of TVs soon enough that has a blue tooth enabled iPhone apple matched to sensors in each version, that will display a image, which is matched to zone and size as displayed on phone, which will guide the owner through a true and useful calibration minus the professional. Home Theater designers and installers, and tweakers won't be effected, people with complex needs or just want to pay for a turnkey expert Hometheater will still be there. But we are about a year or 3 before APP inside of an Iphone as sensor, connected via Bluetooth is a full solution. Do you at least understand that? Time and how we twist the potentiometer move one. The basic single set calibration with be on your Iphone soon enough, for good reason.
Quote:
"
BUT PLEASE, don't go about telling the person looking for the information, that they are wrong to seek it, and it will be useless, because useless is a different thing than not profitable."

This "place" is know as AVS Forums... AVS stands for Audio (&) Video SCIENCE, not Audio Video SPECULATION. And SCIENCE tells us copying settings is not effective and is ESPECIALLY NOT a subject for the calibration thread on AVS because copying settings is not calibration.... not even remotely close to calibration. You are presenting speculation as fact, and you are wrong. We know what the facts are from our own training and experience wth 100s if not 1000s of video displays. I can't even estimate how many different displays I've woked with over the last 10 years or so (I've been involved in imageing systems professionally since 1972 and have been deep into both analog and digital video systems including digital cinema related products for all of that time. As much as digital video eliminates things that were problems in the analog video age,digital imaging in the form of consumer video displays is not an exact science. And video calibration is part science and part art... the art being figuring out how t best hide errors when a TV won't calibrate as well as you'd like and/or how to manipulate the controls in the display when the controls don't work quite right.

Just speak for yourself, you don't need me to speak for everyone that does not agree with you, and I don't think you speak for many who agree with your obvious tact. Tell me about science then tell me about "part art", so at the simplest, why would you chide people to stop talking about using the "part art" in the discussions? I don't know whats insider your Hall of Justice mind, but as I said, if you don't want to participate in the discussion, just move on. If the discussions is going to go without an answer the thread will die by itself. You know how fast NEC Spectraview can hardware calibrate a LCD2690uxi (yes the true white version)....its coming to an App store near you, Bluetooth connection, now need to dangle the sensor wire.
Quote:
"If someone could answer the OP question, anyone have numbers they would like to share for a E701i-A3 the Q version with new menus for color management, the 2014 model
I would be interested in read it."

Then go start a "sharing TV calibration settings" thread. That is not a question to ask in a calibration thread because it has nothing to do with calibration. In fact, it is a patently ignorant question to ask in a calibration thread where everybody to checks in here regularly wants to do nothing more than help people understand calibration, calibration issues, and to answer calibration related questions. I'm going to make the astrology thing an issue again because your position on copying settings is very similar to the opinion of someone who believes in astrology. Quite a few debunking exercises have been done on astrology over the decades, perhaps over the centuries. One of the more clever ones I read about studied a fairly large number of subjects, like well over 100 people. For 3 months they each received their horoscope for their particular "sign" and they were asked record before retiring for the evening how often the horoscope accurately related to what happened to them that day on a 1-5 scale. The test went on for 6 months, but the participants were not told that after the first 3 months, the team performing the study took the horoscopes from the same source and randomly mixed them up so someone who was a "Cancer" could receive the horoscope for a "Pisces" one day, while the next day they might receive a horoscope for a Gemini... just a complete random sample of horoscopes. They then compared results from the first 3 months to results for the second 3 months and there was no difference. Most of the people who participated in the study shrugged it off and kept believing that their horoscope was somehow "real". This is exactly the sort of situation you are in here. You're not likely to find much sympathy for your point of view here.... everybody is entitled to their opinion even if it is wrong. But presenting it as CORRECT when it is NOT... that's what we have a problem with.

Look fellow, this is a discussion forum, which last I checked was for discussing things. If you don't want to participate, don't. I think all the jibberish you wrote right about about Astrology sums up the black art of circle of calibration that your think you need a stinking badge for.. And whom you speak for is only yourself, only yourself. The moonbeam astrology stuff you are selling, I am not buying. You end with that's what we have a problem with YOU. If you want to read your ranting, I don't see people jumping on board, I don't think, that anyone wants what your are smoking, if the results are obvous. DOUG.

I am interested in some calibration settings that the OP may come up with his newer Q model of the E701i-A3, that has forms of CMS, and more settings that the older version. I and one other poster has asked to see what they may have. Useful info. If you don't want to see it, fine, but don't say its not information worth seeing, Don't try to shut people up.
Skew along now
tombaker is offline  
post #19 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 06:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
tombaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by praz View Post

Too bad all these posts that are continually made in this section of the forum requesting calibration settings are not immediately deleted.
Praz, a posting like above, is the biggest waste of all, its like you are tweeting yourself a private thought, and wanting others to read it. And why? You can think that a section called Calibration is only for yourself or what you think it should be, but its not. If your read the OP, he has hardware. If your read replies to the OP, people want to see what he comes up with, its a new model.

I really don't understand why on earth you think anyone want to read a musing such as "Too bad all these posts that are continually made in this section of the forum requesting calibration settings are not immediately deleted" what does it do? You want people to agree with you.....do more posting talking about automated censorship?

There is an OP, some people responding, and at least 2 who are interested in what they are doing. NOT interested.....next thread. Its a nice little thread, except for people criticizing the discussion of and responding to the OP. You are free to consider this rhetorical....really you are.

Do you have a E701i-A3, and if so are you wanting to talk about the Calberation of IT, if so, this may be a thread you want to read, look at the subject, its pretty clear, not interested, ohhh lookie, another correctly identified subject line is right below it....maybe go there?

I am hoping to hear from the OP.....lets see if he does respond.....I can wait, you probably don't want to, probably don't even have the same TV. But since you opined you got a response, amazing these discussion forums. Feel the validation.

Lastly are I wonder if that them there E701i-A3 with its new CMS system needs some extra thought when it comes to Calibration.....I will keep looking, I am interested, this Subject is a topic for me, my cup of Tea.
tombaker is offline  
post #20 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 07:03 AM
Senior Member
 
praz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

If your read the OP, he has hardware. If your read replies to the OP, people want to see what he comes up with, its a new model.
Yes jjthenovice has calibration hardware and asked a specific question regarding the use of that hardware. Then you and dmoney94 post wanting settings for your displays because apparently you believe settings are generic and accurately transfer form one display to the next. It is getting tiresome continually seeing these settings request posts in this section of the forum. After all this section of the forum is for display calibration not let me punch some values into my display and hope for the best. As this thread now has nothing to do with calibration this will be my last post or visit to the thread. Good luck with your plug n' play approach.
praz is offline  
post #21 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 12:11 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: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post


Where do you come up with your 4% FACT. Honestly you just pull that out of think air, and proclaim it to be a FACT that proves your point.

There are numerous links to it in the Calibration thread from all the people like you who have already posted requests like this and have been SILENCED by the FACTS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

Let me check something.....yup my eyes are a meter. Thanks for posting this techobabble, because it confirms my frustration with your first posting. You are professing that people can not See (ie subjectively measure) a HDTV image, and then make ANY judgement of whether it is better or not....and going further you think the power of suggestion is enough for them to think incorrectly also. Funny stuff indeed.

What is funny is how your entire post reveals that you simply do not understand the subject at hand. You clearly have ZERO understanding of how human vision works. If you have never seen color optical illusions, I suggest you do an online search and see just how easy it is for your eyes to be fooled. One way they can be fooled is by placing an accurate white next to a white that has too much blue. The accurate while will be made to APPEAR to be yellow when it is actually correct. And the white that contains too much blue will APPEAR to be white. That kind of error will throw off colors throughout the image and you cannot tell if the images are accurate or not with your eyes because even when you KNOW this will happen, you CANNOT stop it from happening. It's the way eyes work. You are going to feel pretty stupid about making this post when you realize this is 100% accurate information and that you CANNOT trust your eyes to tell you when an image is accurate. This is SO true that your argument is like saying the sky is orange when we all know it is blue. You have that much chance of being right in your thinking about how human vision works. Of course you cannot prove this to yourself because you don't own a meter and calibration software so you can confirm it for yourself like pretty much every calibrator (pro or hobbyist) has already done that and knows it is true. So there you are... your eyes are NOT a meter - whether you think the are or not. Brightness is also an "issue" for human vision... there is a tendency for human vision to pick the BRIGHTEST thing on the screen to be white even if the brightest spot is contaminated with green or red or magenta... within reason of course, there will be a threshold where too much green is going to begin looking like pastel green. We're talking about errors that exist before the off-color white gets that bad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

So if I bring my known source material on a Blue Ray, and run it through several different setups, I can not tell if I think they are good or not.[snip] The ideal of a number beyond the subjective viewer remains laughable.

Yes, that's right. Given 10 or 100 TVs that are set to similar brightness (luminance) levels without horrible errors, but with only ONE being accurate. You would have a 1-in-10 or 1-in-100 chance of identifying the most accurate video display if your only reference was your eyes. Eyes aren't reliable. Period. They are fooled by their surroundings -- as you will find if you look into color optical illusions. One of the illusions has an object present in the illusion in a color that simply does not exist anywhere else in the illusion. And until you block the entire image except for the 1 object you can't see it's correct color. And even when you know what it's correct color is, you can't see it when you reveal the rest of the image... you still see the wrong color. That's why the only way to make a video display accurate is to use a meter. Your eyes will mess you up every time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

This thread is pretty specific, a guy with equipment looking to use it on his TV, fine, and another guy who says, Great to see, tell me your numbers when you get it done. THEN You. Who chastises they guy asking for numbers, and thinks that those numbers would be useless.

You are not the first person to come here and make these same arguments. In every case, the arguments are made by people who know nothing about this topic other than some made-up reality that exists only inside their head. This is not how you advance the human race or how you advance science. I know you're probably a perfectly fine person, but you are coming off here like a pedantic 14 year old rather than an adult interested in understanding video imaging science. And I will remind you again... AVS Forums stands for Audio/Video SCIENCE forums, not AV SPECULATION forums.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

So you are wrong, the numbers will help people,

Sorry, you are the one who is wrong here. In fact, there are MANY MANY MANY examples ALL OVER AVS, made by people who copied settings, and thought the result was WORSE than the settings they arrived at by eye without a meter. There are probably 100s of posts like that on AVS. And in many cases, the people who made the posts decided to go ahead and buy a meter and learn calibration so they could make their own measurements and they CONFIRM later that the copied settings were worse than their "by eye" settings and they also confirmed that once they finally got a good calibration, the end result was better than they could get "by eye" and far better than the copied settings.

You can't believe how difficult it is to even provide you with meaningful FACTS when you know so little about the subject that you can't accept the FACTS over the fantasy that exists inside your head. I don't have to exaggerate anything because science amd rea;ity fo video displays is on my side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

But on his specific Vizio even if you don't believe all of that, they do have a setting called Calibrated Color, what do you think that is? This is new to the Q model, which has all the new nifty feature, which is the topic of this thread.

They have it because somebody in marketing demanded it. They have no budget per TV to actually implement custom calibration on a per-unit basis. Period. You clearly do not understand the realities of how video and home electronics companies work. Do you think the sharpness control actually is USEFUL for anything? After all, it has been there since at least since the 1960s and possibly earlier. Do you think the Sharpness control REALLY sharpens the image? The correct answers are that NO, the sharpness control is NOT useful for anything and NO it does NOT sharpen images. In fact, it adds edge artifacts to the images that do not exist in the original video content. So the only right setting for the Sharpness control is the setting where it does NOTHING... and that is not necessarily the center position or the ZERO position. Very few of the controls in a consumer video display do what they say they do. The Contrast control has NOTHING to do with contrast really. It sets the white level... and that's all it does... sets how bright 100% white is. And the Brightness control.... that has NOTHING to do with Brightness... it sets the BLACK level... the level for 0% white. And that's all it does. So don't think just because something exists in a consumer video display that is is necessarily accurate or even representative of what the control really does. Anybody who knows even a SLIVER if actual facts about how consumer video displays work understands this. And that includes just about any hobbyist calibrator as well as professional calibrators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

My trusty DTP94 disagrees with thoughts about me also.

OK - you own a meter and you believe the stuff you are saying here is true? I give up. Lost cause. Hopeless. Why are you interested in calibrated settings for a TV you own when you have a meter? Oh wait. your meter was made before LED backlights existed. So you can't use it to measure LED-equipped TVs (well you can, you just won't get accurate measurements). I just can't wrap my head around a meter owner thinking the stuff you posted is true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

Just speak for yourself, you don't need me to speak for everyone that does not agree with you, and I don't think you speak for many who agree with your obvious tact. Tell me about science then tell me about "part art", so at the simplest, why would you chide people to stop talking about using the "part art" in the discussions? I don't know whats insider your Hall of Justice mind, but as I said, if you don't want to participate in the discussion, just move on.

You've dug a hole so deep with your "information" that there's nothing left to do but fill it in. This forum thread is for discussion of video display calibration. Copying settings is not part of that discussion because it has been thoroughly debunked. You may as well be arguing about bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, astrology, phrenology, the superiority of one race over another, or devices you can install on your car to magically improve gas mileage to 90mpg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

If the discussions is going to go without an answer the thread will die by itself. You know how fast NEC Spectraview can hardware calibrate a LCD2690uxi (yes the true white version)....its coming to an App store near you, Bluetooth connection, now need to dangle the sensor wire.

Whatever... get a calibrator who knows what he's doing to measure the resultant calibration. NOBODY has made an "autocalibration" system as effective as good measurement gear, good calibration software and an educated operator (i.e. highly experienced hobbyist calibrator or experienced pro calibrator) to show all the things the "autocalibration" missed. Sure you can autocalibrate fast. The problem is, it won't be an accurate calibration. Some things will be better, but there will be a TON of things not dealt with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

Look fellow, this is a discussion forum, which last I checked was for discussing things. If you don't want to participate, don't.

This is a very specific forum thread for discussing video display calibration. Copying settings is not calibration and does not belong in this thread. Period. So look, fellow, shove off. You're in the wrong place and NOBODY here wants to deal with the nonsense that has been posted on your side of the argument any longer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

I think all the jibberish you wrote right about about Astrology sums up the black art of circle of calibration that your think you need a stinking badge for.. And whom you speak for is only yourself, only yourself. The moonbeam astrology stuff you are selling, I am not buying. You end with that's what we have a problem with YOU. If you want to read your ranting, I don't see people jumping on board, I don't think, that anyone wants what your are smoking, if the results are obvous. DOUG.

OK, so the astrologer is calling physics and astronomy baloney. OK. RIght. If you think I'm the ONLY person participating in the Calibration thread who shares my point of view, you are WRONG. It's only the "pop ins" like you who do not understand human vision and the realities of consumer video displays who share your made up reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

I am interested in some calibration settings that the OP may come up with his newer Q model of the E701i-A3, that has forms of CMS, and more settings that the older version. I and one other poster has asked to see what they may have. Useful info. If you don't want to see it, fine, but don't say its not information worth seeing, Don't try to shut people up. Skew along now

The information you are asking for is not worth asking for, getting, or using. It's worthless. Guaranteed. Read, Study. Practice, Study some more. Practice some more, then com back when you realize we are right in this point of view and we will be happy to help you improve your calibration skills.

"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 #22 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 02:22 PM
Advanced Member
 
tombaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

There are numerous links to it in the Calibration thread from all the people like you who have already posted requests like this and have been SILENCED by the FACTS.

You can't believe how difficult it is to even provide you with meaningful FACTS when you know so little about the subject that you can't accept the FACTS over the fantasy that exists inside your head. I don't have to exaggerate anything because science amd rea;ity fo video displays is on my side.

Doug, so much of what your write, is pure generic ad hominid, intended to SILENCE people. Feeling proud to stopping discussion is no virtue. If you read the OP, he is using hardware to calibrate, I and others would like to see the end result numbers, I understand how he trying to go about it, hopefully the like of posts like yours won't silence him. Asking to see what his hardware comes up with, and how it goes into the new CMS and menus, after he figures it all out, is not just asking for a set of numbers. Its see how his method results in what changes. Again and I think you missed it, he is using hardware.

Doug, first you say you can ONLY use hardware, then you complain that a Specraview, and hardware program can do calibration automatically into a Lacie or and Eizo, used for Softproofing. No intervention. Which is it? Actually don't bother.

Yes an eye is a sensor, and can be used as a meter. Subjective is what it is. The key to any good for pay calibrator is provide a result that is customized to the end user. You can be sure that iPhones will soon be used as calibrators, its just an app, the companies can include it for near nothing, once the app is built. You don't understand the manufacturing processes and modern quality control techniques, and you make presumptions of what I know so you push out cut an paste arguments, to as you say silence people. The stuff you say about perception, suggestion is old hat, comprehended already. I don't need to hear why you think signs of the Zodiac are important, stop pushing it. The next thing you will be wanting to to is evolution, and I can already anticipate what you would write. You would fail the Turing Test, in that the participants would think you were a simulation, hitting the same keys same over and over.

Doug, charlatans are nothing new, I am not baffled by Science, which is a major headache to charlatans.

Read the OP, respect the thread. I and at least one other person are interested in seeing the end results. You don't need to participate, you don't need to give your opinion that its a waste of time, your contribution of astrology, Superman and Hall of Justice, and whatever other cartoons you want to proffer as Science, is a joke, perhaps that is your intended outcome.

I don't think anyone reading your attempts to silence people, in this thread, are going to get supporters of how you handle yourself in public, much less if invited into anyone's home.

According yourself in a way that nobody wants to deal with you, is not silencing people by the merits of any facts.
Doug, If you don't have anything to offer this thread, which is not OT, leave it Doug.
tombaker is offline  
post #23 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 04:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GeorgeAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,306
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 109
A reminder of some fundamentals may be in order here. What looks "good" to any individual viewer is not the objective of display calibration. Image fidelity is the goal.

From the "sticky" threads at the top of this section of the forum:

'Display Calibration: Root Fundamentals'
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1021933

'Sharing display menu settings?'
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1055906

'How Viewing Environment Conditions Can Corrupt Or Enhance Your Calibration'
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=849430

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"
GeorgeAB is offline  
post #24 of 26 Old 03-29-2014, 06:33 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: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by tombaker View Post

Doug, so much of what your write, is pure generic ad hominid, intended to SILENCE people. Feeling proud to stopping discussion is no virtue. If you read the OP, he is using hardware to calibrate, I and others would like to see the end result numbers, I understand how he trying to go about it, hopefully the like of posts like yours won't silence him. Asking to see what his hardware comes up with, and how it goes into the new CMS and menus, after he figures it all out, is not just asking for a set of numbers. Its see how his method results in what changes. Again and I think you missed it, he is using hardware.

Doug, first you say you can ONLY use hardware, then you complain that a Specraview, and hardware program can do calibration automatically into a Lacie or and Eizo, used for Softproofing. No intervention. Which is it? Actually don't bother.

Yes an eye is a sensor, and can be used as a meter. Subjective is what it is. The key to any good for pay calibrator is provide a result that is customized to the end user. You can be sure that iPhones will soon be used as calibrators, its just an app, the companies can include it for near nothing, once the app is built. You don't understand the manufacturing processes and modern quality control techniques, and you make presumptions of what I know so you push out cut an paste arguments, to as you say silence people. The stuff you say about perception, suggestion is old hat, comprehended already. I don't need to hear why you think signs of the Zodiac are important, stop pushing it. The next thing you will be wanting to to is evolution, and I can already anticipate what you would write. You would fail the Turing Test, in that the participants would think you were a simulation, hitting the same keys same over and over.

Doug, charlatans are nothing new, I am not baffled by Science, which is a major headache to charlatans.

Read the OP, respect the thread. I and at least one other person are interested in seeing the end results. You don't need to participate, you don't need to give your opinion that its a waste of time, your contribution of astrology, Superman and Hall of Justice, and whatever other cartoons you want to proffer as Science, is a joke, perhaps that is your intended outcome.

I don't think anyone reading your attempts to silence people, in this thread, are going to get supporters of how you handle yourself in public, much less if invited into anyone's home.

According yourself in a way that nobody wants to deal with you, is not silencing people by the merits of any facts.
Doug, If you don't have anything to offer this thread, which is not OT, leave it Doug.

If you look at my first post in this thread. It was NOT directed to the original poster. It was directed to someone else who asked for the calibration settings when the OP was done calibrating. He looked for calibration settings everywhere and can't find any. So when you go criticizing someone, you'd better get your facts straight. So far you haven't gotten ANY facts straight and nothing in the post above is changing my mind. Petulance can't silence the truth. I don't have to make assumptions about what you know because you make it so obvious in your posts. All I have to go by is what you post here and it's all silliness. What else am I supposed to think? I've never had a single word to say to the OP. But you can't understand that. You are just making things up and trying to pass yourself off as someone who is "not baffled by Science". If that's the case, you haven't proven it to anybody here. I have a 42 year history or being paid for my expertise in imaging systems, imaging technology, and consumer & commercial film and video. My work IS this field. I have nothing to gain by disseminating baloney. But there are people who just can't handle the truth, and you are clearly one of them. I have no reason to make this stuff up. If I'm making this up then you'd better go help THX and ISF completely re-write their calibration training programs because you obviously know a lot more about it than they do. I've been through both training programs in spite of decades of imaging systems engineering and support experience. Just to be sure there wasn't anything I wasn't already aware of. Go look at some of the other requests for settings to copy in this Calibration thread... you'll see they all get the same response -- waste of time. Oh, wait, you won't do that because it will blow up the imaginary "case" you've created in your closed mind. Sorry, you are so far off the mark here you don't even realize how bad it is. I've tried to help you by posting the truth. If you won't accept that, you are wasting everyone's time here. If you were serious about wanting to know what you are talking about, you would go do some of the things I've pointed you at in this thread. If you refuse to do that, I'm going to have to report you as a troll to the moderators. I've been helping people with calibration questions FOR FREE for years in this thread and on AVS in general. PROVE to us that you've STUDIED human vision as related to calibration and researched other inquiries about sharing settings in this forum thread so you can understand that everybody gets the same answer... it's a waste of time. And PROVE that you followed the often posted link to the study that shows you do better with copied settings 4% of the time... PLEASE because you just make yourself look goofy by IGNORING the facts you claim don't exist.

"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 #25 of 26 Old 03-30-2014, 02:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
tombaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

If you look at my first post in this thread. It was NOT directed to the original poster. It was directed to someone else who asked for the calibration settings when the OP was done calibrating. He looked for calibration settings everywhere and can't find any. So when you go criticizing someone, you'd better get your facts straight. So far you haven't gotten ANY facts straight and nothing in the post above is changing my mind. Petulance can't silence the truth. I don't have to make assumptions about what you know because you make it so obvious in your posts. All I have to go by is what you post here and it's all silliness. What else am I supposed to think? I've never had a single word to say to the OP. But you can't understand that. You are just making things up and trying to pass yourself off as someone who is "not baffled by Science". If that's the case, you haven't proven it to anybody here. I have a 42 year history or being paid for my expertise in imaging systems, imaging technology, and consumer & commercial film and video. My work IS this field. I have nothing to gain by disseminating baloney. But there are people who just can't handle the truth, and you are clearly one of them. I have no reason to make this stuff up. If I'm making this up then you'd better go help THX and ISF completely re-write their calibration training programs because you obviously know a lot more about it than they do. I've been through both training programs in spite of decades of imaging systems engineering and support experience. Just to be sure there wasn't anything I wasn't already aware of. Go look at some of the other requests for settings to copy in this Calibration thread... you'll see they all get the same response -- waste of time. Oh, wait, you won't do that because it will blow up the imaginary "case" you've created in your closed mind. Sorry, you are so far off the mark here you don't even realize how bad it is. I've tried to help you by posting the truth. If you won't accept that, you are wasting everyone's time here. If you were serious about wanting to know what you are talking about, you would go do some of the things I've pointed you at in this thread. If you refuse to do that, I'm going to have to report you as a troll to the moderators. I've been helping people with calibration questions FOR FREE for years in this thread and on AVS in general. PROVE to us that you've STUDIED human vision as related to calibration and researched other inquiries about sharing settings in this forum thread so you can understand that everybody gets the same answer... it's a waste of time. And PROVE that you followed the often posted link to the study that shows you do better with copied settings 4% of the time... PLEASE because you just make yourself look goofy by IGNORING the facts you claim don't exist.

Doug, sorry, I just won't accept, your offer to delve into your personal psychopathology. (superheros, weapons, astrology, 42 years of handing out advice). I decline. OK, your issues, can be private to yourself, THANK YOU.

Doug, You have been doing the near exact same stuff for years along with GeorgeAB for years. Its a broken record. 3 years ago.....read it....its EXACTLY THE SAME, and others attempted to correct you then too.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1376204/to-calibrate-or-not-calibrate/30#post_21374131

Besides attempting to chill discussion, with unending self promotion, premised on your manifesto of free advice, I just don't see how your continued OT...helps the thread.

AGAIN.
This is a new model of a classic 70 inch display that has, updated electronics, with CMS function not previously there. The OP is going to do some hardware calibration on it, with these new features of the model. The OP is looking and posting how he will go about it. People are interested in what he is doing. A person has asked him to share what changes he is doing to the new menus. It a whole new set of adjustments most of which are set to O until someone goes into them.
Instead of just letting this thread exist out there, with some people with the same model watch and interact with the OP as they work on the same model.
We have 2-3 people try to squash the discussion. And they do this over and over and over. GeorgeAB and DOUG, paired and tag teaming over and over. 3 years ago, today, same ol thing, YEAR after YEAR.

If people are NOT interested in Calibrating this specific Television.......JUST SKIP THE THREAD, AND READ ANOTHER, how bleeping hard is that?
The OP is the first person posting about these brand new model, with regards to calibration. Owners are interested. They changed the motherboard, with a new major update, and kept the Model number exactly the same.
If this is not your TV.....don't post that you don't care....just move to the next thread already.
tombaker is offline  
post #26 of 26 Old 03-30-2014, 03:51 AM
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 23,003
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 411
move on please
markrubin is offline  
Reply Display Calibration

Tags
Vizio E701i A3 Led Hdtv
Gear in this thread - E701i by PriceGrabber.com

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