NEW RANGE JVC 2014 - Page 52 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-05-2013, 12:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geof View Post

Excellent point on the E-field fringing. As you point out that may be the limiting factor and not the lens. That said, I tend to think these are additive and given that the new panels have not even been seen by many of us they may be improved (or not) relative to Mark's findings. I still believe the quality of the lens affects IQ (for example, I can easily see differences in lens quality with increasing camera MP count). I agree with you that magnification affects sharpness. More to ponder, thanks!

To be clear, I'm not trying to make any judgements whatsoever on current or future JVCs, but this thread and JVCs (given Mark's awesome work) provide a good opportunity for me to pose my question about what it really means for a lens to be "good enough" for 4k. I've begun to think that, to use a phrase I saw earlier, manufacturers really have "over achieved" with their lenses, probably due to the fact that people and reviewers tend to use "artificial" test patterns to evaluate digital projectors and expect each pixel to be perfectly resolved with 4 square edges when arguably that's not needed and maybe not even the goal with real content.

Wow it's weird reading that coming from myself, a DLP fan who does like those well resolved pixels eek.gif

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-05-2013, 12:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Geof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Eden NY
Posts: 6,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

To be clear, I'm not trying to make any judgements whatsoever on current or future JVCs, but this thread and JVCs (given Mark's awesome work) provide a good opportunity for me to pose my question about what it really means for a lens to be "good enough" for 4k. I've begun to think that, to use a phrase I saw earlier, manufacturers really have "over achieved" with their lenses, probably due to the fact that people and reviewers tend to use "artificial" test patterns to evaluate digital projectors and expect each pixel to be perfectly resolved with 4 square edges when arguably that's not needed and maybe not even the goal with real content.

Wow it's weird reading that coming from myself, a DLP fan who does like those well resolved pixels eek.gif
One thing to keep in mind is that Mark's work was based on the RS-25/35 and fringing has improved quite a bit since then.

Geof
Geof is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 02:30 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,075
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

To be clear, I'm not trying to make any judgements whatsoever on current or future JVCs, but this thread and JVCs (given Mark's awesome work) provide a good opportunity for me to pose my question about what it really means for a lens to be "good enough" for 4k.

Wow it's weird reading that coming from myself, a DLP fan who does like those well resolved pixels eek.gif

There isn't a flat answer to this because MTF is only part of the equation and that also isn't even a perfect measurement, though some will try to give an answer based on current resolution. It depends on too many factors meaning the answer would have to be based on a test pattern and how close you are to viewing that pattern. "THE LENS" is such a generic term these days. A tiny bit of improvement sure wouldn't hurt as you can always make it a tiny bit sharper, but it will at least resolve some/most of the difference if you sit close enough for 4k. The RS-35 lens in that pic (that sample) isn't nearly as good as the best JVC's of today, whether or not that applies to all samples or just one is another question.

I will just say that a JVC "lens" is already getting close to a 0.95" DLP (not the sharpness, the lens), and IMO the lens is better on the JVC than any 0.65" DLP, the only reason ANY 0.65" would look a TIny bit sharper than a JVC has nothing to do with the lens and has everything to do with convergence and pixel fill. The Benq w7000 is the best "lens" I've seen on a cheap 0.65" DLP and the JVC with good convergence can match the overall sharpness to about 95% of what we can visually perceive.

At current resolutions (cannot speak to 4k res), a near-perfect DLP will always look sharper than an LCOS not just because of convergence, but because of the pixel fill. The wider pixel fill of the pixels on DLP and LCD cause a sharpening like enhancement to our perception, even if an LCOS could have the same MTF or whatever.

There is a slight extra 5% to 20% perceptive sharpness increase on a PJ like the w7000 over the RS-45 if using HTPC while a near-perfect JVC has drifted due to PJ temp and room temp, but it's easily reduced back down to under 10% when the drift is in your favor. I'm sure the w7000 has higher MTF as well, but that's not really the only reason HTPC text appears maybe 5% sharper (maybe 30% of the reason).

Possibly given convergence drift, even your A/C might determine if your "Lens" is good enough to perceptually resolve 4k, and I use the word lens very loosely. Now resolving it on a test pattern is a different story, but that still would depend on the end-design of the PJ, not just the lens.


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 offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 03:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,252
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

To be clear, I'm not trying to make any judgements whatsoever on current or future JVCs, but this thread and JVCs (given Mark's awesome work) provide a good opportunity for me to pose my question about what it really means for a lens to be "good enough" for 4k. I've begun to think that, to use a phrase I saw earlier, manufacturers really have "over achieved" with their lenses, probably due to the fact that people and reviewers tend to use "artificial" test patterns to evaluate digital projectors and expect each pixel to be perfectly resolved with 4 square edges when arguably that's not needed and maybe not even the goal with real content.
You've brought up some good questions. Of course part of this is how we define "good enough" and how that evolves.

My memory of a CRT when I visited a company and member here that did high end CRT installs (mostly for business things like simulation IIRC) is that it was doing about 2:1 or 3:1 contrast ratio between the white pixels and black pixels with single pixel vertical lines at 1080p. This was considered resolving 1080p. I should mention that this was only using the green CRT and blue may have been much worse (but doesn't matter as much).

While this is an old model, we don't know how much is the chips and how much the lens, and how much certain chip factors would come into play with 4K resolution at the chips , I think one of Mark's other graphs is interesting to consider for the RS35. I'm thinking of this one (with the RS35 on the right and Samsung on the left):

a900b_rs35_1_pix.jpg

With 1080p each combination of 1 white pixel with 1 black pixel takes up a little more than 3 grids, so a little more than 1.5 grids for each with a perfect display. With 2160p the sizes would be half that.

I assume they would have some improvement with 4K chips, but just for the sake of discussion, if the same test with a 4K chip would have the peak only go to say 0.65 and the valley only got down to say 0.15 (which I used because the older JVC got down to 0.15 fairly quickly for that pattern), would we consider that "good enough"? If not, what would we consider "good enough"?

I don't have the answer (it is more of a continuim anyway and I've oversimplified it), but I think it is an interesting thing to consider.

It would be interesting to see how the Sony 500/600 would do on that with a 4K pattern, as well as how a picture of the grid with a 2 pixel wide pattern (essentially 1080p) would look compared to that RS35. Of course, the camera could affect this, but maybe a comparison of single pixel lines in 1080p space (so 2 pixel on the Sony) between that Sony and one of this year's JVCs (with eShift off) with the same camera would be more interesting.

--Darin

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 online now  
Old 11-05-2013, 03:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,833
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 432 Post(s)
Liked: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

The wider pixel fill of the pixels on DLP and LCD cause a sharpening like enhancement to our perception, even if an LCOS could have the same MTF or whatever.

DLP and LCOS are similar in fill factor, about 90%, and much higher than LCD, which is in the 60% to 70% range.

Lower fill factor increases the impression of sharpness without any actual increase in image detail, because we are seeing things with higher spatial resolution - the spaces between pixels and the pixel edges.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 06:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RapalloAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 200 Post(s)
Liked: 58
I think we maybe seeing a new lamp on the new JVC models.

Last years models X35,55,75 and 95 used a PK-L22012U lamp, the new X500, 700 and 900 now use a PK-2312U lamp, I have no idea what is different.
RapalloAV is online now  
Old 11-05-2013, 07:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krichter1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicagoland (Naperville)
Posts: 2,653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post

Yes, color-blindness is one option to explain this.

You can't really calibrate the gamut of most rs-45s without an external VP (although as you can see the standard color profile used as a starting point in the example below is not that bad), even using the few options in the service menu, due to the limitation of their native gamut (weird hue on green causing undersaturation of cyan). However, while these remain uncorrectable at 100% sat, all the other points are perfectly correctable using a Radiance and a cube calibration with at least 125 points.

The remaining errors at the edge of the gamut are not really visible as very few actual content would be there, so you can get in effect get the rs-45 close to perfection, and much better (from a color accuracy point of view) than a higher model using the internal CMS. Here are some before/after screenshots.

All measurements made with Discus trained to i1pro2, with the same FOV (field of view).

The results above could be even better purely from a dE point of view, but I use the option in Calman which allows to not balance luminance when doing a cube calibration, and that allows to save a lot of peak brightness and therefore a lot of on/off contrast. So you get a picture which looks great, even if the dEs are a little bit higher than if you were balancing luminance as well (the average is 1.1 and the max 3, so clearly not that detrimental). I can see the loss of brightness and on/off contrast in the resulting picture when balancing luminance, but I can't see the slight loss of color accuracy when not balancing it, so it's a no brainer for this unit in this set up. I bugged the Calman team for ages to offer such a compromise for the JVCs, they did recently and it's a night and day improvement for the JVCs.

Damn that looks good Manni! eek.gifwink.gif

Kevin

You only live once, but if you live it right, once is enough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


==> The Richter Family 3D Theater  
krichter1 is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 07:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krichter1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicagoland (Naperville)
Posts: 2,653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post

I think we maybe seeing a new lamp on the new JVC models.

Last years models X35,55,75 and 95 used a PK-L22012U lamp, the new X500, 700 and 900 now use a PK-2312U lamp, I have no idea what is different.

Well now that's odd… that's the same model# of my old RS50 lamp. tongue.gif

Kevin

You only live once, but if you live it right, once is enough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


==> The Richter Family 3D Theater  
krichter1 is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 07:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ScottJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post

I think we maybe seeing a new lamp on the new JVC models.

Last years models X35,55,75 and 95 used a PK-L22012U lamp, the new X500, 700 and 900 now use a PK-2312U lamp, I have no idea what is different.

Incorrect.

This JVC FAQ says the 2012 Procision-line (X35, X55, etc) use PK-L2312U.

This JVC Accessories page says the 2012 PRO models (RS46, RS48, etc) use PK-L2312UP.

(It's not clear if those two model numbers really represent different lamps. I doubt it.)
ScottJ is online now  
Old 11-05-2013, 08:03 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,075
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

DLP and LCOS are similar in fill factor, about 90%, and much higher than LCD, which is in the 60% to 70% range.

Lower fill factor increases the impression of sharpness without any actual increase in image detail, because we are seeing things with higher spatial resolution - the spaces between pixels and the pixel edges.

They may be similar, but it still matters. From 1.x seating distance, you may not be able to easily discern pixel definition (just like you cannot discern e-shift on/off pixel definition), but you can still see the difference between DLP edge definition from pixel fill and LCOS even with e-shift disabled. In the end, perception is almost all that matters because that is all we see, what we perceive to see is it, nothing else matters really.


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 offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 08:08 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
AV Science Sales 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: A beautiful view of a lake
Posts: 8,885
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 993 Post(s)
Liked: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by krichter1 View Post

Well now that's odd… that's the same model# of my old RS50 lamp. tongue.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ View Post

Incorrect.

This JVC FAQ says the 2012 Procision-line (X35, X55, etc) use PK-L2312U.

This JVC Accessories page says the 2012 PRO models (RS46, RS48, etc) use PK-L2312UP.

(It's not clear if those two model numbers really represent different lamps. I doubt it.)

The RS40/50/60 and RS45/55/65 used PKL2210UP. The PKL2210U would be the same lamp. The RS46/48/56/66 and RS46/49/57/67 use the PKL2312UP.

Mike Garrett, AV Science Sales Call Me: 585-671-2968
Email Me: Mike@AVScience.com
Brands we sell: http://avscience.com/brands/ 
Call for B-stock projectors
Stewart, Seymour, SE, SI, Falcon, DNP & more.
RBH, Martin Logan, Triad, Atlantic Tech., MK Sound, BG Radia, SVS & Def Tech, Denon, Marantz & Yamaha .
AV Science Sales 5 is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 08:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krichter1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicagoland (Naperville)
Posts: 2,653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 80
I was being ironic Mike. wink.gif

Kevin

You only live once, but if you live it right, once is enough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


==> The Richter Family 3D Theater  
krichter1 is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 08:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RapalloAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 1,943
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 200 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottJ View Post

Incorrect.

This JVC FAQ says the 2012 Procision-line (X35, X55, etc) use PK-L2312U.

This JVC Accessories page says the 2012 PRO models (RS46, RS48, etc) use PK-L2312UP.

(It's not clear if those two model numbers really represent different lamps. I doubt it.)

Obviously my dealer in NZ has it wrong then.
RapalloAV is online now  
Old 11-05-2013, 09:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,490
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 803 Post(s)
Liked: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by krichter1 View Post

I was being ironic Mike. wink.gif

Mike was being Iron Mike. Now that is indeed ironic.

Regretfully I can not spend much time chewing apart these lens posts as I spent a long day driving to a complex install in eastern LI and will be working hard for several days. But if 2K lenses by JVC and other mid upper enders such as Sony with its VPL-vw95ES will work fine at 4K, why did Sony feel the need for the uba expensive 1000ES 4K lens and the need to dumb it down with less elements, groups, and the use of plastic on the exit glass when it coud have just used the great over achieving VPL-vw95ES lens or even the HW50 lens. OK just kidding on that one. Its like there is desperation here for a cheap 4K projector and many wishing and trying to explain why JVC might not need to improve their present lens and that it will work just fine with a 4K chip. Sure it will. Done. So let's just conclude that the JVC present lens will be superb for 4K with the e-shift element removed enabling JVC to have a 4K projector next year for around $5K street and it will use the same lens and chassis as are currently used less the e-shift element. They willl trounce the 500/600 and it will be so good that they will drop this foolish II stuff that the marketing department forced the engineers to do against their core beliefs. I hope to have a production sample soon with the new JVC UHD chip with immeasurable pixel spacing and a native on/off that would make a Washington Redskin look politically incorrect. There you have it.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 09:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Schenectady, New York
Posts: 4,907
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 836 Post(s)
Liked: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Its like there is desperation here for a cheap 4K projector and many wishing and trying to explain why JVC might not need to improve their present lens and that it will work just fine with a 4K chip..

That's exactly what it is. There are tons of members here who are way too impatient for a UHD projector to come down to, what they would call, a reasonable price. Unfortunately good glass lenses cost a lot. The unique thing about JVC, that many seem to forget, is that they have an unusually good performing lens on their cheaper units. The reasoning has to do with their manufacturing process. They can justify a great performing lens, one that outperforms almost everything under $5000 MSRP because they produce them in such large quantities throughout their entire line of projectors. All 10 or so models (their professional and reference series) use the same exact lens. I don't know any other manufacturer that does this. In my opinion this is a bad thing when it comes to a UHD/4K JVC projector, at least at first. There will likely be only one model that is truly UHD/4K next year. This means they'll have to produce a lens for a single unit. Not many will be manufactured, at least in comparison to their 1080p models, and that will make the manufacturing price per lens go up and overall drive the total cost of the projector up. I'm not a lens expert and I don't know if this current lens is "good enough" to resolve a 4K chip as well as their 1080p counterparts but my assumption is no. JVC will most likely design a lens specifically for their upcoming UHD projector and because it will cost more per lens it's safe to say it won't outperform the competition at it selling price like the cheaper 1080p models do. I'm going to take a guess that it will retail at a competitive price with Sony's VPL-600ES, or whatever current 4K projector Sony is selling. This will of course not be cheap enough for most and the complaining will continue. rolleyes.gif
Seegs108 is online now  
Old 11-05-2013, 09:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,490
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 803 Post(s)
Liked: 659
I agree with almost everything you said and have said most of it myself earlier. I would disagree as to your use of the word complaining. They will be bitching, not complaining and will oblivious to the economic facts you present about economies of scale. You forgot to throw in UHD chip development and production costs for the relatively small number of projectors JVC can sell at an MSRP of $12K. But then again JVC is a widely discounted brand with extra discounts traditionaly being available at pre order which could bring street down to $xK and then they night mop even the Sony new 4K model next next year at $10K unilateral pricing.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 09:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krichter1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicagoland (Naperville)
Posts: 2,653
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Mike was being Iron Mike. Now that is indeed ironic.

Regretfully I can not spend much time chewing apart these lens posts as I spent a long day driving to a complex install in eastern LI and will be working hard for several days. But if 2K lenses by JVC and other mid upper enders such as Sony with its VPL-vw95ES will work fine at 4K, why did Sony feel the need for the uba expensive 1000ES 4K lens and the need to dumb it down with less elements, groups, and the use of plastic on the exit glass when it coud have just used the great over achieving VPL-vw95ES lens or even the HW50 lens. OK just kidding on that one. Its like there is desperation here for a cheap 4K projector and many wishing and trying to explain why JVC might not need to improve their present lens and that it will work just fine with a 4K chip. Sure it will. Done. So let's just conclude that the JVC present lens will be superb for 4K with the e-shift element removed enabling JVC to have a 4K projector next year for around $5K street and it will use the same lens and chassis as are currently used less the e-shift element. They willl trounce the 500/600 and it will be so good that they will drop this foolish II stuff that the marketing department forced the engieers to do against their core beliefs. I hope to have a production sample soon with the new JVC UHD chip with immeasurable pixel spacing and a native on/off that would make a Washigton Redskins look politically incorrect. There you have it.

It's about time you show your intellectual accumen Mr. H… finally you get it… hopefully now so does everyone else!! wink.giftongue.gif

OH… did I mention . . . BEARssssssssss. biggrin.gif

Kevin

You only live once, but if you live it right, once is enough.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


==> The Richter Family 3D Theater  
krichter1 is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 10:37 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 7,061
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 594 Post(s)
Liked: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View PostDon't get me started on the JVC CMS smile.gif
There is no CMS on the rs45, and I got rid of my rs50 to replace it with an rs45 and a Radiance is because of its broken CMS and broken gamma.
How about the RS35U?
The other reason being of course its fast dimming lamps.
YES too fast
The gamma controls have been corrected since, so hopefully JVC won't break them again, and so have the bulbs, but the JVC CMS is well known for delivering a wildly undersaturated picture if you aim for rec 709 for the gamut calibration. I tested an rs-55 before buying my rs45, and an rs48 when I considered upgrading last year, and the CMS was just as poor.

I do not care about the graphs, I care about an accurate picture.
So do I an accurate picture is all I want :)
The problem with the JVC CMS is that it can deliver great looking graphs with the primary and secondaries spot on the targets, but the picture is completely undersaturated because of what that calibration does inside the rec-709 triangle (most of the other target points at 75%, 50% and 25% are not on target and usually undersaturated).

For most, the standard color profile (or THX on higher models) delivers an accurate enough picture, usually much better than any calibration obtained with the CMS if aiming for the rec-709 target because or the lack of linearity of the CMS. If you care about an accurate picture with a JVC and are only able to calibrate to rec-709 targets, forget about the internal CMS and get a Radiance or if you don't care about 3D an eecolor. Good calibrators know this (hopefully), and can get a very decent calibration from the JVCs, but they will NOT calibrate to rec-709 to achieve this, or they will deliver an undersaturated picture. To deliver an accurate picture with a JVC CMS, you have to aim for slightly oversaturated targets at 100% so that the points at 75% and 50% and not undersaturated. In other words, there is no way to get an accurate picture on a JVC with the internal CMS if you are looking for nice looking graphs.

This plus the fact that most people use inaccurate meters. I use a Discus profiled to an i1pro2, so hopefully my measurements are close enough (although not as accurate as those from a reference meter).

Anyway this is OT in this thread which is about the new range, the majority of readers do not understand or do not care about what we are talking about,
As I said, all I want is an accurate picture when I watch a movie
but when I get my rs49 I will post the (good or bad) detailed results from the CMS as you requested them, and either we'll be happy to report that JVC have fixed their CMS, or you'll see what I mean.
When do you get it, do you do calibrations? It seems many calibrators have no clue :(
wse is offline  
Old 11-05-2013, 10:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Wizziwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post


All measurements made with Discus trained to i1pro2, with the same FOV (field of view).

The results above could be even better purely from a dE point of view, but I use the option in Calman which allows to not balance luminance when doing a cube calibration, and that allows to save a lot of peak brightness and therefore a lot of on/off contrast. So you get a picture which looks great, even if the dEs are a little bit higher than if you were balancing luminance as well (the average is 1.1 and the max 3, so clearly not that detrimental). I can see the loss of brightness and on/off contrast in the resulting picture when balancing luminance, but I can't see the slight loss of color accuracy when not balancing it, so it's a no brainer for this unit in this set up. I bugged the Calman team for ages to offer such a compromise for the JVCs, they did recently and it's a night and day improvement for the JVCs.

Those are some impressive results indeed. Have you ever verified the calibration at the start of a movie and then again at the end? I found that on the RS40, it would drift quite a lot over time. I'm not sure if it was caused by the bulb or panels warming up. Made it hard to calibrate - you can't get accurate colors for the entire duration of a typical 2 hour movie.
Wizziwig is online now  
Old 11-06-2013, 01:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,830
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 468 Post(s)
Liked: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post

Those are some impressive results indeed. Have you ever verified the calibration at the start of a movie and then again at the end? I found that on the RS40, it would drift quite a lot over time. I'm not sure if it was caused by the bulb or panels warming up. Made it hard to calibrate - you can't get accurate colors for the entire duration of a typical 2 hour movie.

Good point. It's not only the rs40, it's all UHP projectors. If you care about accuracy, you do need to warm up the projector for at least one hour before calibrating (watch some TV or play a movie for the kids) otherwise the lamp/panels drift too much to get consistant results. Two hours is better, as that is the point where the drifting becomes insignificant, 30 minutes is the minimum if you are in a rush. Same thing before watching a movie, although 30mn to one hour warm-up is enough for critical watching as most of the drifting will be done by then. But again, if you're very picky or are doing a demo to an expert friend, two hours warm-up time is necessary for both calibration and watching.

This drifting mostly affects greyscale, but gamut too (as getting 100% white to D65 has a huge effect on the gamut, so should be done before any gamut work). One simple way to check for this is to display your RGB balance at 70% or 100% white (avoid 80%-95% as these levels are not always very stable on JVCs anyway), in continuous measurements mode, right after you switch the unit on. Balance it perfectly. Then you'll see as it changes over the first hour. Balance it every 15mn or so, and when it stops moving significantly, you'll know how much warming up time you need before calibrating/critical viewing/checking a calibration.

It's also not a bad idea to leave your meters connected for at least 15mn before calibrating, especially the i1pro/i1pro2 need that time before doing a dark calibration (or even more important, before using them to profile a colorimeter) or they tend to drift too as the electronics warm up and they adjust to ambient temp, especially when measuring low light levels. Then of course you have to take regular dark calibrations with these when the software tells you to.

It's also very important to look for the room temperature if your room doesn't have air conditioning. With the heat from the projector (after all, a JVC is like a 250W+ heater), especially in summer, the ambient temperature rises in the room - and therefore in the projector - and this affects the color temp of the lamp. In some cases it can lead the greyscale to drift way past two hours, until your room temp gets stable and the lamp temp gets stable (which might never happen).

If you don't check for all this, your calibration is impaired and you never watch a movie with a calibrated picture smile.gif . You still get say 80% of the benefit of a good calibration, but you do get significant and visible differences when watching a movie as the picture drifts between the beginning and the end.

That's why good calibrators often spend a significant amount of time with you watching clips before calibrating (or doing stuff they know they'll check again later). It's not only to asses the performance of the projector "before", it's also to warm the projector up (and their tools, and the room) before starting the calibration. Otherwise you can never reproduce these nice looking little graphs...

You also need to touch up greyscale and gamma at least every 200 hours on these projectors if you calibrate yourself and want an accurate picture, although since last year and the new lamp they seem to be much more stable over time.

Now with autocal, people just plug the (usually not so accurate) meter in, switch the projector on, run the autocal, get the nice looking graphs, and think they have an accurate picture eek.gif.
Manni01 is online now  
Old 11-06-2013, 02:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Manni01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,830
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 468 Post(s)
Liked: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

How about the RS35U?

The rs35 is one of the finest projectors ever made by JVC, possibly the best to date for 2D, unless you're sensitive to motion which has been significantly improved in later models. Its gamma controls had been corrected and worked perfectly (unlike the rs20 or the rs50/60) and its CMS works as well as a JVC CMS can, and it can be calibrated fairly easily. Just make sure you clean the prism if it hasn't been done before as on these models (not sure about the rs35 but it was definitely the case on the rs20) they can get clogged up which causes a huge drop in brightness (as much as 50-60% after 500+ hours) and of course replacing the bulb in that case doesn't help. I've never seen this happen on more recent models.

If you have a good unit or can get your hands on one and don't care about 3D, don't ever let it go! Unless you have a large screen (100" or more) and can make the most of e-shift / 4K of course.
Manni01 is online now  
Old 11-06-2013, 05:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,645
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

But if 2K lenses by JVC and other mid upper enders such as Sony with its VPL-vw95ES will work fine at 4K, why did Sony feel the need for the uba expensive 1000ES 4K lens and the need to dumb it down with less elements, groups, and the use of plastic on the exit glass when it coud have just used the great over achieving VPL-vw95ES lens or even the HW50 lens.

Same reason Sim2, DPI, etc, put very expensive lenses in their high end projectors, it's sort of expected at that price point. Maybe look at my question this way, are you (or anyone) saying that the lens in the $25k Sony VW1000ES better than the lens in say the $25k Sim2 Lumis? What about the $80k DPI Titan?

Lets not misunderstand, I'm not saying better lenses don't make a difference. But the mantra here is "You can't make a 4k machine without a '4k' lens, and you can't make a 4k lens cheap." I'm questioning that, not because I feel some despiration to have 4k as soon as possible, but because I don't follow the logic. I mean I've got a respectable (but not fast) telephoto lens for my camera that does a quite nice job at 20 Megapixels, which is quite a lot more resolution than the 8 Megapixels of 4k, yet I'm hearing, essentially, that you just can't make an affordable projection lens capable of resolving 8 megapixels. And when I look at my Planar 8150, I can clearly see that each pixel is square, and there's a gap maybe 1/20 the dimension of a pixel that can be clearly seen when you're up close to the screen.

So riddle me this, if the lens on my Planar 8150 can resolve the pixel gap well, why will it suddenly be unable to resolve something ten times larger than that just by putting a 4k chip in the machine?
GoCaboNow likes this.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 05:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Geof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Eden NY
Posts: 6,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Circling back to the lens discussion for a moment....2K lens performance with 4K signals may not really matter. If the 4K panel is larger than the 2K chip (and I would place odds on that) then a new (larger diameter) lens may be required (depending on the 4K chip size).

The contrast performance of a lens does not impact a projectors on/off capability. But it seems as though it may affect ANSI CR (consider a line pair -- a higher contrast lens has simultaneous whiter whites and blacker blacks which is akin to higher ANSI, no?). Now if that premise is true, and knowing that lens contrast decreases as line pairs increases, and knowing that 4K has double the line pairs of 2K, it would seem that ANSI CR could be affected because of the higher spacial frequencies. We really don't know what is limiting JVC's ANSI (other than "light scatter") but I've often wondered if the lens performance contributed to it. I think we'd all agree we do not want to see ANSI CR decrease in JVC's 4K projectors.

The bottom line though is the JVC designers will work thru the optical design and in that process determine if there are any lens requirement changes and then pass those changes along to their lens supplier.
Personally I expect 4K lenses to cost more and I don't expect 4K prices to rival 2K prices but maybe that's just me.....

Geof
Geof is offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 10:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,833
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 432 Post(s)
Liked: 196
Seems to me that this intrascene contrast difference will only apply over areas of the image so small that the lower MTF applies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geof View Post

The contrast performance of a lens does not impact a projectors on/off capability. But it seems as though it may affect ANSI CR (consider a line pair -- a higher contrast lens has simultaneous whiter whites and blacker blacks which is akin to higher ANSI, no?). Now if that premise is true, and knowing that lens contrast decreases as line pairs increases, and knowing that 4K has double the line pairs of 2K, it would seem that ANSI CR could be affected because of the higher spacial frequencies.

Noah
noah katz is offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 01:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,075
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Generically speaking, the summation of what the lens affects is being used too broadly. I've seen $500 DLP projectors with better pixel definition than a $10,000 LCOS projector, even though these DLP's are not sharper than the JVC because of the DLP's poor video processing and sometimes lack of 1:1 mapping, but on menu text it easily killed the JVC from close-up examination.

Does that mean the DLP projector had a better lens than the JVC, no it means it has less CA than the JVC has convergence error + CA, well that and the fact DLP has a better defined pixel grid to the wider fill. So how can we equate everything to the lens, doesn't really make sense. Convergence error comes from the panel alignment, CA comes from the imperfections in the lens (inadequately matched achromatic lens assemblies presumably). CA and convergence cannot be used interchangeably even though it is often difficult for the eye to decipher the difference. There isn't a lot of CA in these lenses I've noticed lately, I have a $600 Viewsonic projector that has as little or less CA than a $2000 Benq DLP, explain that one. Sure the Viewsonic has a pixel mapping error in video, but in the menu text it easily matches the Benq and maybe beats it, and easily beats the JVC in menu text.

To me the difference in the LENS is mainly the focus uniformity and lack of CA and fringing when converged near perfectly (very tight focus), the rest of the equation usually comes down to convergence and the way the panels and light path are projecting pre-optics in general. That last tiny bit of definition of say the sharpest DLP vs. the next sharpest DLP is not the same as with an LCOS lens. This is not the case with LCOS, it has convergence issues always to some degree, so improving the lens more and more has at best incremental benefits. Garbage In / Garbage Out applies even in optics. You may be able to separate convergence and sharpness to some degree with measurements and test patterns, but the eye perceives it as one thing.
noah katz 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 offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 02:23 PM
wse
AVS Special Member
 
wse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 7,061
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 594 Post(s)
Liked: 385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manni01 View Post

The rs35 is one of the finest projectors ever made by JVC, possibly the best to date for 2D, unless you're sensitive to motion which has been significantly improved in later models. Its gamma controls had been corrected and worked perfectly (unlike the rs20 or the rs50/60) and its CMS works as well as a JVC CMS can, and it can be calibrated fairly easily. Just make sure you clean the prism if it hasn't been done before as on these models (not sure about the rs35 but it was definitely the case on the rs20) they can get clogged up which causes a huge drop in brightness (as much as 50-60% after 500+ hours) and of course replacing the bulb in that case doesn't help. I've never seen this happen on more recent models.

If you have a good unit or can get your hands on one and don't care about 3D, don't ever let it go! Unless you have a large screen (100" or more) and can make the most of e-shift / 4K of course.

I have an RS35U how do you clean the prism?

I have an opportunity to get an RS49 at a good price is it worth it, I could care less about 3D I only want 2D?
wse is offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 02:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,490
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 803 Post(s)
Liked: 659
Take out the bulb cage with the bulb in it. You will see a sort of glass plastic whatever element that the light must pass through. Clean this surface with a lens cleaning cloth. When you rub the surface with a microfiber lens cleaning cloth, you will remove some brown flim and raise the amount of light entering the light engine. Don't forget to reeinsert the bulb cage and lamp or you will be unhappy with the results of the cleaning.
ScottJ likes this.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 02:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sunny SoCal
Posts: 1,682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by krichter1 View Post

Well now that's odd… that's the same model# of my old RS50 lamp. tongue.gif

Ruh Roh!! Run..run!! eek.gifbiggrin.gif
RonF is offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 02:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
coderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 10,075
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 160
After my last post, I'm going to sneak out of the forums stage left without being seen. But my $500 Viewsonic (whatever it costs now) has a better lens than the Sony vw95es, no maybe not, because the vw95/hw30/hw50/hw55es have a panel issue (not just alignment of the colors, but the way the grid definition projects itself from the light path block that the electronics that form the grid cause). They need to combine JVC and Sony panel tech to produce a better LCOS, but between 2 competitors will never happen. When the JVC's light is blocked from the electronics on the panel to form the pixel grid, it is relatively clean, the Sony isn't (lower-end Sony's). However, since many Sony's also have focus uniformity issues, then that can be blamed from the lens. Sony has panel + lens issue, JVC just minor panel issue compared to a DLP, DLP no 3 panels so no issue. So hard to judge a lens.

I'll put my $500 Viewsonic Lens up against the $25,000 Sony vw1000/vw11000 lens any day (me runs for the border). I'm sure the higher-end Sony's work differently, but just saying. I kid not that if judging purely by internal menu text, the VS appears to win out of all of them (and the lens probably cost $80). Too bad VS ruined the sharpness by crazy fouled up processing.


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 offline  
Old 11-06-2013, 03:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 20,833
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 432 Post(s)
Liked: 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

...I have a $600 Viewsonic projector that has as little or less CA than a $2000 Benq DLP, explain that one.

More lens shift (inbuilt + applied)?

Noah
noah katz is offline  
 

Tags
Sony Vpl Vw1000es Projector , Jvc Dla X900r , Jvc Dla X700r
Thread Tools


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