Projector Mini-Shootout Thread 2013-2014 - Page 259 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 21Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #7741 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 11:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 262
thanks for the info, I didn't see any obvious change in contrast either. It fills the screen perfect @ 17 feet from the 142", I would have had to mount it ~22 feet back with the other lens.

now it's off to lowes later for some materials I need to make masks. I've been planning to do this for 2 years and motivated by some of the recent posts in the DIY thread.

years ago I bought the material from Dalite that they use on the cinema contour frames. It's very dark, thick adhesive material so the masks will match perfect. I went to go buy some more a few months ago and the price was outrageous. It was obvious that they didn't want to sell the material anymore to end users.
zombie10k is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7742 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 12:25 PM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citation4444 View Post

Yes, and it's probably not who you think in this case.  

+1
Dj Dee is offline  
post #7743 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 12:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Despite the complaints I am going to post some things about the comparisons. Some of this is about comparisons in general.

This is avscience.com. I shouldn't even have to explain why it benefits us to take a scientific approach when differences are seen and try to figure out why certain differences were seen. If somebody wants to start a site like iShallNotBeQuestionedButCanQuestionOthers.com they can, but I think the avscience approach is better.

I said before that being overly touchy can make it more difficult to figure things out and then I think more evidence was provided with the complaints about being questioned and an approach to try to keep people from questioning things. Right from the start I have a seen a, "Don't question me or my calibrator" attitude. I can't think of any posts here from Kris or I where we have tried to keep people from asking us questions about how things were setup or what results we were getting. Could be wrong as always though and I'm not going to search back to verify right now.

I've read multiple times that the pictures posted prove what was seen. I have tried to verify that the pictures do represent what was seen and so far what I have gotten is that the pictures do show what was seen in person. So, let us take that for a fact for a moment.

I've attached a cutout of the LG logo from the lower right of the Eiffel Tower pictures from both projectors. People can use a program that will sample the pixel values with the original pictures if they want. I used Microsoft Paint with the eye dropper and going into edit colors to see the values and for as much the same spot on the L as I could do I got a luminance value of 128 from the JVC's picture and a value of 146 from the Sony's picture.

This is a scene where the iris shouldn't close on the JVC at all (not sure about the Sony in Full).

So, if we assume that the pictures do accurately show what was seen in person then this mid level gray on this low detail object was seen as brighter with the Sony than the JVC.

If Andreas knows so much that he should not be questioned then I think he should be able to tell everybody exactly why this mid level gray showed up as dimmer with the JVC. If he wants to claim a single factor then a test could be run later to change only that one factor and see if it is the reason.

I have some theories, but they are only theories at this point and I'm not going to state as a fact why this mid level gray shows up as dimmer in this fairly bright scene with the JVC with the projectors brightness matched and using the same gamma.

I also think that Zombie's point about different screens is a good one. This is the right avscience.com way of doing things IMO. I was trying to go down this general path of trying to figure out the differences as there are many factors that can affect things.



Dj Dee,

You are also welcome to tell us exactly why the LG logos are dimmer in the JVC's picture. It seems that your position is that the pictures accurately represent what you saw, so if they don't please tell us now that they don't.

--Darin
maximus74 and Elix like this.

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #7744 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 12:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,753
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

thanks for the info, I didn't see any obvious change in contrast either. It fills the screen perfect @ 17 feet from the 142", I would have had to mount it ~22 feet back with the other lens.

now it's off to lowes later for some materials I need to make masks. I've been planning to do this for 2 years and motivated by some of the recent posts in the DIY thread.

years ago I bought the material from Dalite that they use on the cinema contour frames. It's very dark, thick adhesive material so the masks will match perfect. I went to go buy some more a few months ago and the price was outrageous. It was obvious that they didn't want to sell the material anymore to end users.

Nice, I hope the masking system comes out great. I want to go CIH with motorized horizontal masking down the road. The masking systems are very expensive and I don't think I'm talented enough to build one myself. I better start saving my pennies. tongue.gif
Seegs108 is offline  
post #7745 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 12:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
cardoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Beyond The Wall.
Posts: 680
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

thanks for the info, I didn't see any obvious change in contrast either. It fills the screen perfect @ 17 feet from the 142", I would have had to mount it ~22 feet back with the other lens.

now it's off to lowes later for some materials I need to make masks. I've been planning to do this for 2 years and motivated by some of the recent posts in the DIY thread.

years ago I bought the material from Dalite that they use on the cinema contour frames. It's very dark, thick adhesive material so the masks will match perfect. I went to go buy some more a few months ago and the price was outrageous. It was obvious that they didn't want to sell the material anymore to end users.


Although the Velvet worked out great for me. Having the material you have would make assembly much easier and cleaner. I was actually considering going to a local steel shop and getting aluminum panels made, and using the adhesive material you have. They would last forever be perfectly straight and actually worth some resale value. I mean I would pay up to 500 bucks to have professionally made panels that lasted forever. I am happy with what I have and they work perfect, but it is still cardboard so over time they may start to fall apart. There is a screen company that sells aluminum panels that attach to a screen with magnets but they would not sell me the panels because I have a different screen. Even though they appear to be the same screen. lol I bet they would sell a ton of panels if they re thought that policy.

James Reid:D
cardoski is offline  
post #7746 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 12:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

Despite the complaints I am going to post some things about the comparisons. Some of this is about comparisons in general.

This is avscience.com. I shouldn't even have to explain why it benefits us to take a scientific approach when differences are seen and try to figure out why certain differences were seen. If somebody wants to start a site like iShallNotBeQuestionedButCanQuestionOthers.com they can, but I think the avscience approach is better.

I said before that being overly touchy can make it more difficult to figure things out and then I think more evidence was provided with the complaints about being questioned and an approach to try to keep people from questioning things. Right from the start I have a seen a, "Don't question me or my calibrator" attitude. I can't think of any posts here from Kris or I were we have tried to keep people from asking us questions about how things were setup or what results we were getting. Could be wrong as always though and I'm not going to search back to verify right now.

I've read multiple times that the pictures posted prove what was seen. I have tried to verify that the pictures do represent what was seen and so far what I have gotten is that the pictures do show what was seen in person. So, let us take that for a fact for a moment.

I've attached a cutout of the LG logo from the lower right of the Eiffel Tower pictures from both projectors. People can use a program that will sample the pixel values with the original pictures if they want. I used Microsoft Paint with the eye dropper and going into edit colors to see the values and for as much the same spot on the L as I could do I got a luminance value of 128 from the JVC's picture and a value of 146 from the Sony's picture.

This is a scene where the iris shouldn't close on the JVC at all (not sure about the Sony in Full).

So, if we assume that the pictures do accurately show what was seen in person then this mid level gray on this low detail object was seen as brighter with the Sony than the JVC.

If Andreas knows so much that he should not be questioned then I think he should be able to tell everybody exactly why this mid level gray showed up as dimmer with the JVC. If he wants to claim a single factor then a test could be run later to change only that one factor and see if it is the reason.

I have some theories, but they are only theories at this point and I'm not going to state as a fact why this mid level gray shows up as dimmer in this fairly bright scene with the JVC with the projectors brightness matched and using the same gamma.

I also think that Zombie's point about different screens is a good one. This is the right avscience.com way of doing things IMO. I was trying to go down this general path of trying to figure out the differences as there are many factors that can affect things.



Dj Dee,

You are also welcome to tell us exactly why the LG logos are dimmer in the JVC's picture. It seems that your position is that the pictures accurately represent what you saw, so if they don't please tell us now that they don't.

--Darin

I can not give you an explanation why this happens, but I have told you time and time again that the projectors was brightness matched with a 100 IRE pattern from the AVS testdisc and both with the iris on. They were both placed at the same level to show the same brightness on the dnp Supernova 08-85 screen. What else can I do??

And yes they represent what was seen on screen, but of course not accurately as I know of no camera that can accurately do this.eek.gif

And I don´t see where DJ Dee and I question your methods, I have only questioned why we see things so different and maybe said there was something wrong with your sample and I got a clear answer when the VW600 you tested was broken.cool.gif

And I really want to hear your explanation of why this happens.smile.gif
Dj Dee likes this.

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
post #7747 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 01:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Dj Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Norway
Posts: 209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

I can not give you an explanation why this happens, but I have told you time and time again that the projectors was brightness matched with a 100 IRE pattern from the AVS testdisc and both with the iris on. They were both placed at the same level to show the same brightness on the dnp Supernova 08-85 screen. What else can I do??

And yes they represent what was seen on screen, but of course not accurately as I know of no camera that can accurately do this.eek.gif

And I don´t see where DJ Dee and I question your methods, I have only questioned why we see things so different and maybe said there was something wrong with your sample and I got a clear answer when the VW600 you tested was broken.cool.gif

And I really want to hear your explanation of why this happens.smile.gif

1+1+1
Dj Dee is offline  
post #7748 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 02:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Elix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Dungeon, Pillar of Eyes
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

one thing I noticed, the short throw lens does not have the static, crescent moon shaped plate in the path.
Just to illustrate what Zombie meant:
dHu7gCH.jpg?2

At first I though that was the Dynamic Iris. And when I saw it wasn't moving I though mine was faulty. Heh.
Elix is offline  
post #7749 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 02:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,753
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
The DI is located further back in the light path. It's inside the sealed part of the light engine after the light tunnel.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #7750 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Elix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Dungeon, Pillar of Eyes
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

I can not give you an explanation why this happens, but[...]
So, I am now working on a Mitsubishi HC5 vs. Planar PD8150 shoot-out and while I wouldn't want to spill the beans I feel this is the perfect opportunity to post this.
So, both projectors were brightness matched at 15.5 ftL at the beginning of the test. Mitsubishi has 15000:1 native contrast and Planar has 15000:1 dynamic contrast. First there are pictures of ANSI checkerboard to show you both projectors were brightness-matched and later some color bar tests with 100%, 75%, 50% and 37% brightness. Then I put Burosch test image. And lastly, a scene from For a Few Dollars More (frame 18758).
http://yadi.sk/d/7ZK4PHeJLvMjk

Nothing was changed. Camera settings were the same. My question to you. Why does the Planar looks brighter?
a) Because of gamma difference;
b) Because of lamps warm-up time difference;
c) Because of Dynamic Iris algorithm;
d) You name it.

And then, if we accept that Planar is brighter despite being brightness-matched in the beginning — is this comparison valid?
Elix is offline  
post #7751 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 6,990
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 263
Probably b and c. Once you start using a dynamic system it is hard to compare as they do different things to gamma and white. It's an imperfect test but you do your best to compare them.

Contributing Editor/Writer
Sound And Vision Magazine

Click Here To See My Current Setup
Kris Deering is offline  
post #7752 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

So, I am now working on a Mitsubishi HC5 vs. Planar PD8150 shoot-out and while I wouldn't want to spill the beans I feel this is the perfect opportunity to post this.
So, both projectors were brightness matched at 15.5 ftL at the beginning of the test. Mitsubishi has 15000:1 native contrast and Planar has 15000:1 dynamic contrast. First there are pictures of ANSI checkerboard to show you both projectors were brightness-matched and later some color bar tests with 100%, 75%, 50% and 37% brightness. Then I put Burosch test image. And lastly, a scene from For a Few Dollars More (frame 18758).
http://yadi.sk/d/7ZK4PHeJLvMjk

Nothing was changed. Camera settings were the same. My question to you. Why does the Planar looks brighter?
a) Because of gamma difference;
b) Because of lamps warm-up time difference;
c) Because of Dynamic Iris algorithm;
d) You name it.

And then, if we accept that Planar is brighter despite being brightness-matched in the beginning — is this comparison valid?

Of course it is valid, what more can you do to brightness match them. This is also what we see with the JVC vs Sony even after brightness matching them after a long warm up.

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
post #7753 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Elix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Dungeon, Pillar of Eyes
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post

Probably b and c.
As expected coming from you. You are absolutely right. Except in this case it is "a" also. smile.gif And once I found out about this I called it a day for this test.
My point to Andreas is, there are a lot of factors even knowledgeable (even professional) calibrators can't account for on their 1st try all the time! That goes to your pro calibrator as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

Of course it is valid, what more can you do to brightness match them. This is also what we see with the JVC vs Sony even after brightness matching them after a long warm up.
Your position is different from mine. Let's accept that right now. But answer this, do you think any person would choose a dimmer picture over a brighter one? In these examples? This is a rhetorical question, of course. Nobody will choose a dimmer image. Does it mean the brighter projector wins? NO! In a next step I will truly brightness match them and that will turn the tables, or not, depending on what other image characteristics will tell.
Elix is offline  
post #7754 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post

Probably b and c. Once you start using a dynamic system it is hard to compare as they do different things to gamma and white. It's an imperfect test but you do your best to compare them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

As expected coming from you. You are absolutely right. And once I found out about this I called it a day for this test.
My point to Andreas is, there are a lot of factors even knowledgeable (even professional) calibrators can't account for on their 1st try all the time! That goes to your pro calibrator as well.

Then according to you is is not possible to test two different projectors with DI side by side in a right way?? If you brightness match at 100IRE after a long warm up period, the differences you see will be because of the different way the DI´s work with gamma and white. This will then show what PJ shows the best picture in different scenes and is why I think we see sometimes the JVC looks better and sometimes the Sony looks better. As I don´t know the tech and algorithms behind the different Sony and JVC DI´s I can not explain it in another way.

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
post #7755 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Elix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Dungeon, Pillar of Eyes
Posts: 1,186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andreas21 View Post

Then according to you is is not possible to test two different projctors with DI side by side in a right way??
In my opinion, it is possible. But not in the way you an Dj Dee suggested - only by judging by the pictures. I am sure you realize that our displays and cameras have some limitations which won't allow us to convey everything we see with our eyes. You tell us to judge by those photos and tell us it was the same way your eyes saw. But you know what? I took those photos 1 hour ago and I don't actually remember what my eyes saw. tongue.gif Was there really that much brightness difference, or was it my camera? I don't truly remember.

And I can make a 2000:1 DLP projector look better than a 15000:1 on/off contrast LCoS projector. On the photo. Because a photo is only a tool to convey what I think, and feel (or want to think/feel).

And let me be as impudent as to state a mutual opinion in this thread. Nobody questions you or Dj Dee as to what projector you preferred. Nobody questions both projectors' strong points. Let's be reasonable and move on with this topic if there's nothing more constructive to tell.
Elix is offline  
post #7756 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

In my opinion, it is possible. But not in the way you an Dj Dee suggested - only by judging by the pictures. I am sure you realize that our displays and cameras have some limitations which won't allow us to convey everything we see with our eyes. You tell us to judge by those photos and tell us it was the same way your eyes saw. But you know what? I took those photos 1 hour ago and I don't actually remember what my eyes saw. tongue.gif Was there really that much brightness difference, or was it my camera? I don't truly remember.

And I can make a 2000:1 DLP projector look better than a 15000:1 on/off contrast LCoS projector. On the photo.

And let me be as impudent as to state a mutual opinion in this thread. Nobody questions you or Dj Dee as to what projector you preferred. Nobody questions both projectors' strong points. Let's be reasonable and move on with this topic if there's nothing more constructive to tell.

Then I think you should tell me how to do it, because I don´t think anyone else here knows about any other way to brightness match two different projectors with DI´s for a side by side comparison. And if you come up with a better method I will gladly use it for my next side by side test. And of course we don´t judge this by looking at screenshots.

I know this and I don´t like using screenshots and if you read my posts I say it shows close to what we see on screen. And screenshots can be of help if you take them in the same HT, with the same screen, settings, and so on. And how I can say it shows close to what we saw on screen is that I was present and looked at the screen and pictures. And no camera can produce a 100% accurate picture of what we see on screen. But you guys can try to take apart what Didrik and I did with this test, but it will not change my view.

The reason why screenshots taken in different rooms and with different cameras and so on is not valid is like you say it is not hard to make a bad projector look good and vice versa. But this is not what we did. I normally hate screenshots and you will clearly see this in my comments in the screenshot war tread. I never take screenshots, but DJ Dee does this sometimes to show differences to people who is not present at the test.

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
post #7757 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 03:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
Andreas21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elix View Post

As expected coming from you. You are absolutely right. Except in this case it is "a" also. smile.gif And once I found out about this I called it a day for this test.
My point to Andreas is, there are a lot of factors even knowledgeable (even professional) calibrators can't account for on their 1st try all the time! That goes to your pro calibrator as well.
Your position is different from mine. Let's accept that right now. But answer this, do you think any person would choose a dimmer picture over a brighter one? In these examples? This is a rhetorical question, of course. Nobody will choose a dimmer image. Does it mean the brighter projector wins? NO! In a next step I will truly brightness match them and that will turn the tables, or not, depending on what other image characteristics will tell.

I have many times when testing projectors side by side and not brightness matched them and preferred the one dimmest, this is because brightness is only one factor in picture quality. If you don´t have any experience you will 100 times out of a 100 pick the brightest as the winner.

Regards
Andreas

My Homecinema

Andreas21 is online now  
post #7758 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 04:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,753
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
I see two sides to this. If the DI implementation on the Sony does indeed make the image brighter (or certain parts) does that mean the Sony has the better image? You could simply say that the DI on the Sony does a better job with PQ compared to the JVC because it makes the image look brighter (ie better). Going off of what Darin said, it looks like the Sony is 14% brighter with it's white luminance in that shot with the LG logo. I'm sure it differs from shot to shot, but if we were to make the JVC 14% brighter and compare that scene again would we see any difference?

Disregarding contrast performance by putting both in their respective "best modes" (DI enabled on both), why not use the static manual iris only on both to brightness match and look at a mid-apl level shot where the Sony won't get totally blown away by the JVC. Do we see a difference in dynamics to the image if neither is using a DI? Or is the difference Andreas and DJ are talking about only because the the Sony has a more appealing DI implementation or better smart sharpening feature? I only ask because it seems the actual hardware used (4K micro-displays, higher lens quality, better light path design, ect) don't seem to make a big difference in PQ. From all this back and forth it seems that the Sony can put out a better image on some scene merely because it has better software to give better subjective image dynamics. Is that a pretty good summation?
Andreas21 likes this.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #7759 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 04:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
StevenC56's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,683
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Has it been confirmed that the Sony 600 sample Tom Norton and Kris Deering tested was in fact "broken"?
StevenC56 is offline  
post #7760 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 04:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ultra 150 pilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Western mass
Posts: 1,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
So much for moving on.....
ultra 150 pilot is offline  
post #7761 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 05:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 6,990
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenC56 View Post

Has it been confirmed that the Sony 600 sample Tom Norton and Kris Deering tested was in fact "broken"?

Absolutely not. But without another 600ES here to compare with I can't confirm that it isn't "broken" either. So rather than going round and round through all the hoops that I've been trying to jump through to appease others here, I'm calling it quits. Maybe at some point I'll have access to another 600ES and I can see how it performs, maybe not. It looks like there is a better than average chance that I'll get a 1100ES in the near future though and we'll see how that goes. But that will be a formal review. I may do a comparison after the review is turned in and published though.

Contributing Editor/Writer
Sound And Vision Magazine

Click Here To See My Current Setup
Kris Deering is offline  
post #7762 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 05:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,753
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
It would seem like a huge waste of time to just throw out all your effort thus far when you'd only need to spend a little more time with another unit to confirm your findings. I'm sure there is a forum member local to you or at least one dealer around where you can go and test a few things for an hour. I think you really just want to test out the DI, correct? It seems like an awful shame if you can't take a look at another unit just to confirm what you're seeing is due to a faulty DI or not. Plus, I'm sure this would make your forthcoming 1100ES review more informational. You could make accurate comparisons between the two units if you confirm what you've seen to be true or not. smile.gif
Seegs108 is offline  
post #7763 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 05:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 6,990
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 263
Closest person I know of is about two hours from here and I don't know him well. The local dealer that was selling them stopped due to frustrations with dealing with Sony on the projection side.

Contributing Editor/Writer
Sound And Vision Magazine

Click Here To See My Current Setup
Kris Deering is offline  
post #7764 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 06:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,955
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

I see two sides to this. If the DI implementation on the Sony does indeed make the image brighter (or certain parts) does that mean the Sony has the better image? (SNIPPED)... it looks like the Sony is 14% brighter with it's white luminance in that shot with the LG logo...

(SNIPPED)...
From all this back and forth it seems that the Sony can put out a better image on some scene merely because it has better software to give better subjective image dynamics. Is that a pretty good summation?

14% brighter isn't very much to the eye.
HoustonHoyaFan likes this.


Quick and Easy Shelf Mount Method for both one projector or dual stacks

Web Calculator v023 & v025
- Quick Peak at the new upcoming calculator
**Current Projector Calculator** -- http://www.eliteprojectorcalculator.com

Coder's Top Projector Picks of 2012 --http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....

coderguy is online now  
post #7765 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 06:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,753
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
According to many it makes for quite a visual difference on the Sony. I believe the words "dynamic" and "3D" have been dropped several times.
DaViD Boulet likes this.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #7766 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 07:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HoustonHoyaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

If Andreas knows so much that he should not be questioned then I think he should be able to tell everybody exactly why this mid level gray showed up as dimmer with the JVC. If he wants to claim a single factor then a test could be run later to change only that one factor and see if it is the reason.
...
Dj Dee,

You are also welcome to tell us exactly why the LG logos are dimmer in the JVC's picture. It seems that your position is that the pictures accurately represent what you saw, so if they don't please tell us now that they don't.
Darin, I'm sorry but now you are just being absurd. JVC and Sony have always had very different processing models from the basic chip back plane all the way through their output software. Only a JVC or a Sony engineer could answer your question.

The method used by Andreas21 and Dj Dee to brightness match the two projectors are quite reasonable and now that I have looked at Cine4Home's measurements would yield identical light output. The X500 measures ~1030 lumens in high lamp and the VW600 would measure 1,500 lumens * 70% in low lamp or ~1050 lumens. That is a closer match than most comparisons I have seen over the years on this forum.

If you need to 'cross examine' someone maybe you should find out how Kris was able to use the manual iris setting to brightness match the VW600 inn Auto full as he claimed since the manual iris setting should have zero effect in Auto full?

It may be best to just conclude as I suggested that there was something screwed up in the VW600 that Kris had and move on from there without pointing fingers on either side.
Citation4444 and Andreas21 like this.
HoustonHoyaFan is offline  
post #7767 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 07:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
HoustonHoyaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,963
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

According to many it makes for quite a visual difference on the Sony. I believe the words "dynamic" and "3D" have been dropped several times.
Could you point to posts where many have claimed that the Sony is dynamic and 3D because it is 14% brighter on an image.
HoustonHoyaFan is offline  
post #7768 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 07:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
blee0120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Merillville, IN 46410
Posts: 3,531
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 53
Finally watching my first movie on the 49. Calibrated it right before and everything went with a breeze calibrating. Watching Riddick and its my second time seeing "inky blacks." First time was a CRT. I thought I would have to wait some years for a projector that gave me 150,000:1 CR with good brightness. With the invisible DI, I get 300K+ on a less than $4000 projector.
blee0120 is offline  
post #7769 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 07:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 3,753
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Liked: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonHoyaFan View Post

Could you point to posts where many have claimed that the Sony is dynamic and 3D because it is 14% brighter on an image.

That isn't what I said. With the DI engaged Darin measured white luminance levels (on white pixels) to be 14% brighter with that mid apl shot even though the two units were "brightness matched". Many attribute the DI implementation, which causes this difference, to give the image higher image dynamics and 3D feel. I'd be glad to quote those posts where they said there was better image dynamics and 3D feel if you'd like me to.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #7770 of 8765 Old 04-06-2014, 07:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 322
This thread is getting rather ugly and is getting worse, and people are getting not to like each other. It has gone beyond the point of constructive responses and arguments and has progressed to attacks.

For what its worth, the name of the forum, AV Science is really only a moniker. Some things are very scientific, such as calibration. But many things are subjective observations with an attempt towards scientific justification. In the art of speaker evaluation, it is easy to set SPL levels equal across a broad frequency bandwidth.

With a projector and especially using DIs, there are many known and unknown variables. We seem to ignore such things as screen materials for example which I find to be subjectively very important with respect to the illusion of you are there and not watching a reflecting surface.

Now we are in the point of this thread where posts are getting repetitive and essentially I am right and you are not. Its time to stop. Really. no more last words. What is the point of further polarization and alienation. This is supposed to be fun.
Mr. Hatcher likes this.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Benq W7000 Home Projection System , Jvc Dla Rs55 Bundle , Jvc Dla Rs45 Home Theater Projector 1080p Hdmi , Epson V11h502020 Powerlite Home Cinema 3020e 2d And 3d 1080p Wireless Home Theater Projector , Sony Vpl Hw50es 3d Projector , Epson 5010 Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector , Epson Powerlite Home Cinema 3010 2d And 3d Projector V11h421020 , Panasonic Ptae8000u Hd Projector , Mitsubishi Hc7900dw Home Theater 3d Projector , Mitsubishi Hc8000dbl Dlp 3d Home Theater Projector With Spare Lamp 1300 Ansi 12 6 Lbs , Darbeevision Darblet Hdmi Video Processor , Epson 5020ub Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector
Gear in this thread

User Tag List

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


Forum Jump: 

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

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