Sony VPL-vw1000 - Page 34 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #991 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:09 AM
Pip
Senior Member
 
Pip's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post

Have you tried them on a 95 yet? That would be a more fair comparison.

Speaking of the 95, when does yours go up for sale?

Pip
Pip is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #992 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:09 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 22,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 111
I agree we should either merge the threads or start an actual "Owner's Thread" soon.

For my latest Reviews and stuff Search -> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com
Follow me: @joerodhometheat
Check out my Dolby Atmos/Surround first take:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
joerod is offline  
post #993 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:26 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Home Theater Magazine had 860 lumens in their review.

Art


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is offline  
post #994 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JonStatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by pteittinen View Post

Define "true uncompressed 1080p" or the quoted bit is meaningless.

I think you missed the thrust of my point. I was emphasising that blu-ray is still not the limit of what 1080p material is capable of containing and thus a 1080p display is capable of representing. This was a couple of years ago but if I recall it was a 4:4:4 12-bit 24fps uncompressed data stream at around 350MB/s. It was being fed from an SSD. The content was demonstrated in an equivalent compression as found for HD Satellite, then the blu-ray encode, then the uncompressed, and then back to satellite. It was quite shocking to be honest.
JonStatt is offline  
post #995 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:42 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,305
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by dangc View Post

Yikes! is this through your A-Lens or using Zoom? Trying to figure out what your throw is. Either way, at the longest I calculate the throw at roughly 1.85 if using A-Lens which is not long throw. So this now becomes the lowest lumen rating recorded on this projector....

By the way how is the brightness uniformity? Was the 993 lumens a result of 5-9 point method or center?

This is zooming, center reading , Minolta LS 110 luminance meter,after calibration,three hours on the lamp.

Art


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



iRule rules my theater
 

"If she's amazing she won't be easy,if she's easy she won't be amazing"

 

Bob Marley

Art Sonneborn is offline  
post #996 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cam Man View Post

Amirm, with all due respect, I don't understand your motivation to type your fingers off to educate Art (and maybe the rest of us) why his theory is so wrong rather than trying to seek out understanding as to what and how this Sony is making him so happy with what he sees.

My motivation is to discuss the science of video. I have been professionally and personally been involved in it for > 20 years so I thought it is useful for people know the science of what is possible and what is impossible. And what did I tell you that Sony's own manual didn't?

Or are you saying that I mistook the word "science" in the name of the forum?

Quote:


Please forward a theory as to why he and others are so impressed. I don't think you are suggesting that he is dillusional or mass hysteria is at play here.

I am not here to tell you why you are impressed. That is a personal opinion and impression.

I tried to address a specific scientific point: that BD has more resolution than 1080p. We can discuss that objectively. And I did and happy to drill into the mathematics if you think that was not enough.

What you saw subjectively, I also tried to explain in simulations with the pictures that I had, and posted snapshots of the projector itself. I showed how perceptually you can think the projector is sharper but how that is just contrast improvement which comes as part of interpolation being turned up at the high-end.

If you tell me you rather not know the science and like to think something is there that can mathematically be shown to not be there, and confirmed by the manufacturer of the projector to not be there, be my guest. But please don't ask me to play along .

I should note: this is one of the oddest comments I have ever received on something like this .

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #997 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Cam Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ & Los Angeles,CA, USA
Posts: 2,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonStatt View Post

I recall it was a 4:4:4 12-bit 24fps uncompressed data stream at around 350MB/s. It was being fed from an SSD.

That sounds like the feed from a Panavision Genesis digital cinema camera...and others.
Cam Man is offline  
post #998 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 11:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
adidino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

Home Theater Magazine had 860 lumens in their review.

Art

Also from a 20ft throw per the reviewer. Seems like the common them is the lumens drop considerably from 20ft. At least for some us, including me.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Owner, AudioXtream.
Authorized Dealer for Kef, Triad, Bryston, Auralic, Audeze, Grado, Audioquest, Marantz
adidino is offline  
post #999 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 12:05 PM
Scott Horton, techht.com
 
GetGray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Mid-South USA
Posts: 5,448
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post

I would add that Joerod has the unit mounted at 13.5 feet from the screen per his review.

For the beginners it's important to understand the distance from the screen is irrelevant without screen size. What affects the light output related to throw is the relative position of the zoom lens. If it has 10 clicks then which click it is on will define the lumens at that setting. That will be constant regardless of the distance to a screen. As screen sizes used at that zoom position change then screen brightness will change, lumens will not. It is the THROW RATIO or ZOOM POSITION ON THE PJ that correlates with the lumen output. It works just like a variable aperture zoom camera lens.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
GetGray is offline  
post #1000 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hifiaudio2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,635
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 62
The HT review was also from a pre prod machine that Sony only claimed top end lumens of 1500 on. So it was supposed to be 500 lumens low from the production models right from the start, before any calibrations.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
hifiaudio2 is online now  
post #1001 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 12:23 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 4 View Post

Maybe I am missing something about what seems intuitively obvious. We have a display with a native resolution of 4096 x 2160. We can basically input in my world of sources 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p 24 and 1080p 60. If the projector had a native panel of 1920 x 1080, the souces below 1080p would be deinterlaced if necessary and scaled if necessary and most would clearly look better to our eyes than if displayed by a panel that was their native.

If you took a 480p image and displayed it with larger pixels on a 480p projector and then showed that on a 12 foot screen, what would bother you is the size of said pixels which would become very visible. Upscaling then to a 1080p projector reduces pixel sizes and with it, gives an image that looks less "digital."

If you have a 1080p projector today and are not seeing the pixel edges, then making the pixels yet again smaller gives you no benefit. Further, the smaller pixels reduce an artifact of display pixels which is to provide a sharpness boost. So all else being equal, an interpolated 4K image will look somewhat softer than on the 1080p. Sony knows this so I suspect by default it is sharpening the image as it is upscaling it. That is what I showed from the review snapshot. There will be artifacts as clearly seen in those images in the way of increased halos.

Quote:


The one exception might be that 720p might appear a tad sharper on a 720p native display but the extra pixel density and more let's call it paint on the screen might make it look better especially at close seating distances.

That's right. That is the pixel edge effect I explained above.

Quote:


So now we take all those sources and display them at 3840 x 2160 or 4096 x 2160. Greater pixel density, more paint. Better scaling, better deinterlacing perhaps, better sharpening, whatever. Greater detail? It depends on how you define it.

It doesn't depend on anything. Honest! The math doesn't provide for any dependency. All frequencies > 1080p were thrown away at the time the video was scaled to 1080p to store on BD disc. No amount of wishing that those pixels coming back makes them come back . Scalars as used in this projector has no intelligence with respect to image content to synthesize new pixels as their own manual admits.

Quote:


Real or approximated? Real? Of course not silly. They are silicon. Yea but they look so delicious I just want to reach out and touch them.

Well, you wouldn't be the first guy who likes a manipulation of something instead of having it be transparent . Here are the two side-by-side images again:



I am sure if I conducted a poll, everyone would say the image on the right is higher resolution and better. Problem is, if I apply the same thing to a different image, then you would complain. Didn't I hear people say film grain was exaggerated? Well that is one of the problem areas.

Quote:


The source records a number of data points. Points between those points are not recorded. The detail recorded is thus limited. But is like connecting the dots in a child's drawing book. The more dots recorded the more accurate the drawing but if the dots are close together, connecting the dots with a straight line would be fairly accurate. But our machine has wonderful scaling. It examines more than two dots and concludes that the line needs to be slightly curved based on other near points.

There is no "examination" going on. That would require image knowledge and the Sony scalar does not have such knowledge. If I gave you two dots, how would you know that there should be a direct line between them or a curved one?

I appreciate your layman description but the science here is precise and tells you that you can increase your interpolator taps but that is not going to give you more detail. It simply changes the frequency response of the "filter" that it is, and with it, can cause the image to not lose some of the resolution it already has.

Remember, the *ideal* interpolator's (scalar's) job is to do no harm to the source. Everything is a step down, not up! In reality, interpolators can be dialed to produce extra sharpness and artifacts or softer images and less artifacts. The mathematics of the filter (again that is what a scalar is), tells you this.

Quote:


Add the curve, calculate the contrasts, it looks like greater detain to ones eye. Nothing really different here than before. Just more pixels and better processing. What am I missing?

One key thing: it is NOT the image that was viewed and approved by the talent when the video was produced! If your goal is to color the video, then by all means go for it. Turn up the reds, it will make roses redder. Turn up the green, it will make the grass, well, greener . I thought our goal in this forum is to discuss how not to do things this way.

Quote:


The scaler is presenting an approximation of the detail that would be presented in a 4HD or 4K source.

It is not even taking a baby step to do that. The resolution of what you are seeing is 1/4 of 4K. But sure. Why not humor me. Show me a test pattern that pattern on BD discs that on this projector resolves 3K pixels. You have something like this?

Again, you are talking about something that Sony itself says it is not possible. Why would they say this if what you are saying is true?

Quote:


Just like a lower res panel presenting an even lower res source. The more actual dots to start with, the better will be the approximation.

Only if you captured it that way. Otherwise, it is wishful thinking and anti-science talk.

Quote:


Throw more computer power at it, throw in some fuzzy logic or whatewver.

There is no fuzzy logic. There is no Hal 2000 in there either. There are techniques for creating super resolution from multiple frames of something. But they tend to misfire and create horrendous warping artifacts. And at any rate, can be very expensive to create.

Quote:


It fools you eyes into thinking you are there.

And I don't want to be fooled . I want exactly what is on disc. I don't want my projector to boost contrast, create halos, exaggerate compression artifacts and film noise. But sure, it is good to have the tool for people who crave such things and that is why we have the adjustment dials on displays.

Quote:


So what am I missing here?

You mean other than science?

Guys, nothing wrong with loving this projector. Say that you love the picture and we are done. But please, please, let's not pretend there is some magic explanation or increased resolution here. These are basics of signal processing I am talking about.

Let me finish by saying that the demos I saw at CES showed this projector to be a fine specimen. And it may be the best there is in that price range. So please you all, don't be defensive . Just trying to make sure your back is protected as you sing the praises of this projector, lest we want to sound like the hallways of Bestbuy .

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #1002 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 12:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
dangc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 641
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

This is zooming, center reading , Minolta LS 110 luminance meter,after calibration,three hours on the lamp.

Art

So this is short throw? Amazing......was this after full calibration, if so did you measure prior to calibration? Sorry for so many questions but this is very disturbing.....
dangc is offline  
post #1003 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 12:47 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 22,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pip View Post

Speaking of the 95, when does yours go up for sale?

Pip


For my latest Reviews and stuff Search -> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com
Follow me: @joerodhometheat
Check out my Dolby Atmos/Surround first take:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
joerod is offline  
post #1004 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 12:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pteittinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Amir, thank you for injecting a bit of science in this thread so overflowing with emotions (nothing wrong with those) and subjectivity (nothing wrong with that either).

Please, feel free to call me by my first name, Petri.
pteittinen is offline  
post #1005 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pteittinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonStatt View Post

I think you missed the thrust of my point. I was emphasising that blu-ray is still not the limit of what 1080p material is capable of containing and thus a 1080p display is capable of representing. This was a couple of years ago but if I recall it was a 4:4:4 12-bit 24fps uncompressed data stream at around 350MB/s. It was being fed from an SSD. The content was demonstrated in an equivalent compression as found for HD Satellite, then the blu-ray encode, then the uncompressed, and then back to satellite. It was quite shocking to be honest.

Heh. I spent half an hour writing a long reply to this but in the end realised I had totally forgotten the point I was trying to make. In short: yes, there's more to 1080p (and Blu-ray can do 1080p just fine as far as raw pixel resolution is concerned) than resolution alone and Blu-ray's image quality is hobbled by its 4:2:0 chroma system. But that's the best we as consumers have to feed to our consumer displays that are similarly hobbled by 8-bit processing and/or panels. I don't know how VW1000 would react to real 4:4:2 or 4:4:4 1080p content but I'm quite convinced there's no true new information being created when VW1000 is displaying 1080p 4:2:0.

Please, feel free to call me by my first name, Petri.
pteittinen is offline  
post #1006 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 2,650
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by GetGray View Post

For the beginners it's important to understand the distance from the screen is irrelevant without screen size. What affects the light output related to throw is the relative position of the zoom lens. If it has 10 clicks then which click it is on will define the lumens at that setting. That will be constant regardless of the distance to a screen. As screen sizes used at that zoom position change then screen brightness will change, lumens will not. It is the THROW RATIO or ZOOM POSITION ON THE PJ that correlates with the lumen output. It works just like a variable aperture zoom camera lens.

Thanks for keeping the discussion honest Scott. I bit my tongue a little as I posted knowing full well that it's meaningless without screen size. The problem was, all I saw listed in his review was that it was a 120" screen. So I didn't know if that was 120" wide or diagonal. Nor did I know what aspect it might be. Not to mention I saw no mention of screen hight.

My observation with the available information and my point was that his recorded higher lumens measurement was associated with a short throw vis-a-vis Art's, HT Magazine, or adidino's lower lumens with a longer throw.
b curry is offline  
post #1007 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:11 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

And I don't want to be fooled . I want exactly what is on disc. I don't want my projector to boost contrast, create halos, exaggerate compression artifacts and film noise. But sure, it is good to have the tool for people who crave such things and that is why we have the adjustment dials on displays.

Still one purist left apparently. A good defense of a dead ideology.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is offline  
post #1008 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
samalmoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 14
i know nothing but aren't larger pixels surrounded by a matrix of no information and if you have more pixels with less no information matrix doesn't that result in more information or detail to your eye?
samalmoe is offline  
post #1009 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pteittinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

Still one purist left apparently. A good defense of a dead ideology.

So... you don't calibrate your displays, then?

Please, feel free to call me by my first name, Petri.
pteittinen is offline  
post #1010 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:22 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Lawguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by pteittinen View Post

So... you don't calibrate your displays, then?

I do. I pick and choose the things that I think make pq look best to me. I see how 4k scaling could be very cool. We live in the photoshop age. If you don't like the original, well, just change it.

Affable Nitwit
Lawguy is offline  
post #1011 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pteittinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

I do. I pick and choose the things that I think make pq look best to me. I see how 4k scaling could be very cool. We live in the photoshop age. If you don't like the original, well, just change it.

I sense a great disturbance, as if a million DoPs and cinematographers suddenly cried out in frustration.

Please, feel free to call me by my first name, Petri.
pteittinen is offline  
post #1012 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JustMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Posts: 2,231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 19
I stopped by a local dealer this morning because I heard that they had just received a VW1000. They very kindly demoed it for me for about 90 minutes on my own content, plus a 3D disc of theirs since I didn't have one with me.

Wow.

This projector was essentially straight out of the box without any kind of proper calibration, projecting (zoomed) onto a StudioTek 130. The room was totally light controlled. I didn't get the exact size, or throw.

I was very impressed with the image. Plenty of punch, plenty of brightness, excellent blacks. The motion handling was superb. I was sitting so close to the projector that my head actually bumped it at one point. I could clearly hear the fan (and the iris!), but I was thinking, "This thing is really quiet on low lamp. I wonder how it will be on high." Then I found out it was on high! We set it to low and it was just a whisper.

There were only two things I noticed, and I'm sure one of them is down to the lack of calibration:
  1. The blacks were very, very slightly crushed. This is, I'm sure, fixable with a little adjustment.
  2. On Super 8, with Reality Creation off, watching chapter 3 (the chapter with the train crash), film grain seemed to be emphasized. We turned Reality Creation on and set both sliders to zero, and this actually reduced the apparent grain, but it was still more noticeable than on a recently-calibrated C3X 1080. I wonder whether one of the many settings would affect this.

The 3D we watched was the animated movie with the owls, and it looked very good indeed. I noticed a strange phenomenon in some of the shots and I don't know how to describe it. Perhaps it was related to some false contouring in the image causing some weirdness with the 3D process. I didn't notice if the smoothing setting was on, so perhaps this could also be tweaked. Otherwise the 3D was among the best I've seen -- dramatically better than the JVC. Possibly comparable to the magnificent 3D Solo, although I've never seen that movie on that projector.

Anyway, the VW1000 is now at the top of my list for projectors, and I'm wondering whether I really need my Prius.

Any thoughts on the film grain observation?

Mike Kobb
(Formerly "ReplayMike". These opinions are mine alone, and in no way reflect the opinions of employers past or present!)

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
JustMike is offline  
post #1013 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 01:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Steve Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Olympia, WA, USA
Posts: 1,434
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Sit one of those DPs or cinematographers down with a DVD, a player, and two large displays, one with 480p resolution, and one with 1080p resolution, and ask him or her which display is truer to the original projected film image. He or she will always say the 1080p display has greater verisimilitude. It won't matter that the video is deinterlaced and upscaled from 480i to 1080p. And if the deinterlacing and scaling is adaptive of picture content, the more the end result looks like the film. Who is the purist in this example, the one who insists that the 480p display is true to the original video, or the one who insists that the 1080p display is truer to the real source, the original film?

Anyone who argues that the 480p display is preferable or closer to the mark is plain silly, and they know it. Why do they think they get to make the same argument when the scaling goes from 1080p to 2160? What matters is verisimilitude to the original picture, not some digital intermediate that is technologically limited. If tricks are employed to get there, such as sampling and compression on the one end, or scaling on the other end, what does it matter?

Of course, the above only applies if you are close enough to actually see the difference between 1080p and 2160p.

Steve Goff
Steve Goff is offline  
post #1014 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 02:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
adidino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustMike View Post

There were only two things I noticed, and I'm sure one of them is down to the lack of calibration:[list=1][*]The blacks were very, very slightly crushed. This is, I'm sure, fixable with a little adjustment.

Properly tweaked, black crush is non existent. I demoed some scenes from the RR Hall of Fame Concert. Sting was wearing a black sport coat with a black tshirt. I could clearly distinguish both and could and even clearly see some black fuzz on his jacket and t. Black levels are amazing on this thing. Amazing how it handled the various shades of black.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Owner, AudioXtream.
Authorized Dealer for Kef, Triad, Bryston, Auralic, Audeze, Grado, Audioquest, Marantz
adidino is offline  
post #1015 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 02:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
dangc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 641
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post

Thanks for keeping the discussion honest Scott. I bit my tongue a little as I posted knowing full well that it's meaningless without screen size. The problem was, all I saw listed in his review was that it was a 120" screen. So I didn't know if that was 120" wide or diagonal. Nor did I know what aspect it might be. Not to mention I saw no mention of screen hight.

My observation with the available information and my point was that his recorded higher lumens measurement was associated with a short throw vis-a-vis Art's, HT Magazine, or adidino's lower lumens with a longer throw.

Art is not at long throw with 14' wide screen at 19'-7" throw. This puts him at 1.4 to 1 throw ratio.
dangc is offline  
post #1016 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 02:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,083
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 755 Post(s)
Liked: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

Still one purist left apparently.

Just one? I thought everyone posting in this part of he forum is of that type. Pretty sure there are a lot of people here who would not want distorted pictures.

This is what happens when you try to sharpen an image. Top half is the original, the bottom is the sharper version:



See the distortion in the high-frequency patches on the right? Even in the low frequency patches you now see more issues. Look at the blocking errors and ringing next to the thick lines (which were probably were there mildly in the original image I found online but now heavily exaggerated).

Quote:


A good defense of a dead ideology.

It is news to me that we no longer care about fidelity and science in this forum. Is there a consensus view that we should no longer care here?

Amir
Founder,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is online now  
post #1017 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 02:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JonStatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Just one? I thought everyone posting in this part of he forum is of that type. Pretty sure there are a lot of people here who would not want distorted pictures.

This is what happens when you try to sharpen an image. Top half is the original, the bottom is the sharper version:



See the distortion in the high-frequency patches on the right? Even in the low frequency patches you now see more issues. Look at the blocking errors and ringing next to the thick lines (which were probably were there mildly in the original image I found online but now heavily exaggerated).


It is news to me that we no longer care about fidelity and science in this forum. Is there a consensus view that we should no longer care here?


I agree that the destruction of fine detail on a 1080 display, which is displaying a 1080 image, is highly undesirable and so sharpness controls should be avoided in that instance. But what if you use the "extra" pixels instead to provide things like edge enhancement. You are not removing any of the original image detail, but complimenting it with extra available pixels. This is only something you can do when you have more display pixels available than the original source. From a purist point of view it is still blasphemy. But there is a middle ground that is better than what you are illustrating in your picture.
JonStatt is offline  
post #1018 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 02:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
adidino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,216
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 48
So who's using or planning to use an AT screen with this projector? Which one do you have or plan to own? I should make final decisions tonight.

I'm torn between the Stewart ST 1.3 MP, Enlightor 4K, or Center Stage XD


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Owner, AudioXtream.
Authorized Dealer for Kef, Triad, Bryston, Auralic, Audeze, Grado, Audioquest, Marantz
adidino is offline  
post #1019 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 03:04 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 22,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustMike View Post

I stopped by a local dealer this morning because I heard that they had just received a VW1000. They very kindly demoed it for me for about 90 minutes on my own content, plus a 3D disc of theirs since I didn't have one with me.

Wow.

This projector was essentially straight out of the box without any kind of proper calibration, projecting (zoomed) onto a StudioTek 130. The room was totally light controlled. I didn't get the exact size, or throw.

I was very impressed with the image. Plenty of punch, plenty of brightness, excellent blacks. The motion handling was superb. I was sitting so close to the projector that my head actually bumped it at one point. I could clearly hear the fan (and the iris!), but I was thinking, "This thing is really quiet on low lamp. I wonder how it will be on high." Then I found out it was on high! We set it to low and it was just a whisper.

There were only two things I noticed, and I'm sure one of them is down to the lack of calibration:
  1. The blacks were very, very slightly crushed. This is, I'm sure, fixable with a little adjustment.
  2. On Super 8, with Reality Creation off, watching chapter 3 (the chapter with the train crash), film grain seemed to be emphasized. We turned Reality Creation on and set both sliders to zero, and this actually reduced the apparent grain, but it was still more noticeable than on a recently-calibrated C3X 1080. I wonder whether one of the many settings would affect this.

The 3D we watched was the animated movie with the owls, and it looked very good indeed. I noticed a strange phenomenon in some of the shots and I don't know how to describe it. Perhaps it was related to some false contouring in the image causing some weirdness with the 3D process. I didn't notice if the smoothing setting was on, so perhaps this could also be tweaked. Otherwise the 3D was among the best I've seen -- dramatically better than the JVC. Possibly comparable to the magnificent 3D Solo, although I've never seen that movie on that projector.

Anyway, the VW1000 is now at the top of my list for projectors, and I'm wondering whether I really need my Prius.

Any thoughts on the film grain observation?

This projector is very addictive. I am hooked. I snuck in to see some of Star Wars 3D and the image was just not sharp enough. Brightness some scenes was lacking severely. I think just after a few days I am spoiled.

For my latest Reviews and stuff Search -> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com
Follow me: @joerodhometheat
Check out my Dolby Atmos/Surround first take:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
joerod is offline  
post #1020 of 10446 Old 02-13-2012, 03:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pteittinen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

It is news to me that we no longer care about fidelity and science in this forum. Is there a consensus view that we should no longer care here?

Only when it gets in the way of a good circlejerk.

Please, feel free to call me by my first name, Petri.
pteittinen is offline  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Sony Vpl Vw1000es Projector , Casio Rs 232 Adapter Catalog Category Projectors Accessories
Gear in this thread

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