Originally Posted by Pincho
Calibration on most TV's is totally over-hyped. When a movie like Robin Hood drops the colour palette down it can look awful calibrated properly. Basically I ignore calibration now, and just make the picture look good even if it is supposed to be wrong. I am actually quite annoyed at the amount of AV enthusiasts think that calibration actually means anything. Basically it is a way to make yourself appear to use your hobby to its highest level, where as infact you are being manipulated into believing hype.
All that most TV's have to adjust are...
Then you have
But at the end of the day a disc is there for just
Brightness (black level) see even I have to go with a technical term. (Just make the black, black)
Now if you can't get those 4 things right by eye you are a tree frog.
Now let's think about the hype of bleeding colours.. too much colour saturation. Too much brightness. Big deal to be honest. If you can't see the colour bleeding then don't worry about it, you probably don't have too much of it anyway. If the red is spread across the screen then you will see it, adjust by eye to get rid of it.
So much over-hype.
I believe that some projectors have more settings. Then fine.. but I'm just talking TV's here.
There's nothing wrong with tweaking to personal taste, and I agree that a "set it and forget it" mentality is ill-informed; calibration should probably be regarded more as a baseline, considering the inconsistencies in film mastering, disc authoring, and other transmission discrepencies. I'm not even completely sold on the need for ISF calibration anymore, at least not for anyone other than "professional" reviewers, simply because: digital displays tend to be a little more accurate than analog was and the color spectrum can change too much as the lamp ages, not to mention room color can bias our perception of the video's color too.
Unless you can do it yourself, with 2-4 thousand hour lamps, the expense of frequent checkup may be harder to justify. That money could buy a lot of movies. And when the technology is improving so rapidly, it seems a more prudent investment to put it aside for upgrading to a better quality display in a few years than to spend several hundred every 6-12 months just to ensure fleshtones are absolutely perfect in the relatively few films these days that are actually meant to look natural. Of course ISF is more beneficial than that, especially with components that are further off the mark.
But, assuming you buy a display known to have a reasonably accurate grayscale out of the box and set it up in a color neutral room, basic level settings can not
be set accurately enough by eye any more than you can hear timbre changes and level settings just by listening to a movie's soundtrack. Whether you choose to strictly adhere to a calibration discs recommendations or loosely adhere to them either in an attempt to compensate for perceived authoring error, print age and deterioration, or personal taste, such discs are still invaluable in helping you realize the potential of your components and recognize their limitations.
Reviewers have to be a little more thorough in the steps they take toward insuring their perceptions are more a reflection of what's actually being reviewed than room influence or equipment bias, but anyone who doesn't calibrate an aspect of their display properly has no business whatsoever
, criticizing that aspects a/v reproduction or quality; even a calibrated display can be biasing enough, uncalibrated equipment pretty much guarantees perception will be more reflective of the hardware than the software. Criticizing a DVD or BD based on the perception from uncalibrated components isn't much different from jacking up a pick-up truck, refitting it with tractor-sized rims and tires and assuming the factory speedometer settings will still be accurate.