Originally Posted by rlindo
I can only hope those who don't have much experience or knowledge will see that and not believe it and actually think these sets with the mythical yellow sub pixel can't be calibrated with equipment or that they'll be off since that is so far from reality I have to just shake my head each time I unfortunately read it.
The user from what I gather has zero experience with equipment on these sets (or any set for that matter) so it's nothing but an assumption on his part and he has made comments before that have clearly indicated he doesn't know how the equipment in question works which is understandable yet it doesn't really make sense for someone who doesn't know how something works to comment on it like they do. I have never performed surgery yet if I were to talk about surgery like I knew what I am talking about (when I don't) would people believe me if I talk in a way that seems convincing or would they believe what an actual surgeon says who is saying something different from what I am? Forums like this should be about sharing information so people can be further educated rather than spreading misinformation.
Using equipment with these sets is really quite easy and you can get a good image but in order to realize that you actually have to use the equipment in question rather than making assumptions of something you have no clue about and disregarding the results and feedback of people who have used the equipment and who keep confirming that your assumptions are wrong which you refuse to accept for whatever reason.
I don't know about others but I actually go by what people who have experience with something say rather than someone who doesn't have experience.
Regarding the link that was posted, any DIYer with equipment can and will do those steps because they know they are required to dial in an image. The result may not be as good or as accurate as a pro (it'll be close if the person knows what they are doing and has decent equipment) yet it will be far better than someone just trying to do something by eye who thinks their eye is superior to measured and calibrated equipment. This is of course if someone is actually trying to calibrate their display rather than tweak it to look how they want it to look. Two totally different things. If someone just wants their display to match some preference they have in their mind then the eye is clearly the way to go.
I have to call you on the 'mythical' business, rather than just dismiss
you as a malcontent once again. The yellow pixel is not mythical!
Read up on your parents' TV sometime and you'll see loads of
controversy over its utility, but not one word about its mere existence.
Having used PhotoShop for over a decade and having worked in
color printing for twice that long, I do have a picture in my mind
of what good, balanced color looks like. It is you who reverse
engineers your own perceptions to accomodate your machine readings.
The Quattron sets have driven professional calibrators crazy since
their introduction several years ago. They have driven high priests
of color theory equally batty. It doesn't help that Sharp pulls so
many switches on the public with the system. Originally it was
meant to expand the color gamut, but the change to LED backlight
made the emphasis on brightness instead -- especially for 3D.
But to utilize the non-mythical yellow spectrum and mainain some
balance with the R, G, and B components is proprietary to Sharp.
I will be glad to see the readings that the professional, familiar with
the 4-color system, produces for our new acquaintance. Stay tuned...