OFFICIAL JVC DLA-RS4500 $35,000 4K THX certified HFS I want one thread - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3Likes
  • 1 Post By RLBURNSIDE
  • 2 Post By Craig Peer
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 08:11 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 6,323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked: 275
OFFICIAL JVC DLA-RS4500 $35,000 4K THX certified HFS I want one thread

http://www.soundandvision.com/conten...kPTkMcmOO4Y.97

-laser light source
-3000 lumens
-20,000 hour operational life
-4096 x 2160 resolution
-31% narrower pixel gap than prior devices
-6 banks of 8 blue laser diodes
-for screen sizes over 200"
->80% of BT2020
-infinite contrast ratio
-HDR10
-HLG


Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!

Last edited by anthonymoody; 12-23-2016 at 08:32 AM.
anthonymoody is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 08:13 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 6,323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Interesting and cool that it supports HLG.

Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!
anthonymoody is online now  
post #3 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 08:22 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mtbdudex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 5,754
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 689
when will ALL the technology in this PJ be under $10k?
Well, it's too much a light cannon for my humble HT screen size, currently 130" scope but will grow to 145" scope at next upgrade.
mtbdudex is offline  
 
post #4 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 08:29 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 6,323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post
when will ALL the technology in this PJ be under $10k?
Well, it's too much a light cannon for my humble HT screen size, currently 130" scope but will grow to 145" scope at next upgrade.
What's crazy to me is that your screen is pretty large by HT standards, probably at the very high end of the range (though I recognize there are crazy people, of whom I'm jealous, with still larger screens), and yet it's still "too bright" for your set up.

That said, perhaps it's about overhead for HDR.

But yeah, the sad thing is that when this tech streets for $10k the first 8K PJs will be hitting...

Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!
anthonymoody is online now  
post #5 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 08:33 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,706
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5565 Post(s)
Liked: 3542
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post
I want one too. Looking forward to getting one of these in our new demo room.

mjgarrett100@gmail.com

My Baffle wall LCR build: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...-tpl-150h.html
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #6 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 09:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,186
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1540 Post(s)
Liked: 1218
I don't get why JVC is following Sony down a dead end with true 4K.

4096 x 2160 will deliver an inferior image to 3840 x 2160 in ALL usage scenarios other than with DCI content which cannot be purchased by consumers.

Facts: With UHD Bluray content or streaming UHD content, 99.9999% of which is in 16:9 aspect ratio (3840x2160 or 1920x1080), you should watch it in pillarbox to avoid unnecessary re-scaling which costs sharpness. That's entire point of high res, which is defeated by extra rescaling / resampling steps. This is 100% incontrovertible. Don't do it. Either with UHD or FHD content, stick to 1:1 aspect ratio upscaling for FHD and avoid any scaling whatsoever for UHD content.

Given that true 4K content is basically nil, why the extra 6% of pixels?

Q) Will it cost me anything to just leave those blank? YES : LUMENS. Lumens matter for HDR, and 3D, and even 2D.

Imagine losing 6% of your brightness to project black pillars 100% of the time. This is dumb and wasteful. Do people even sell 17:9 aspect ratio screens? Probably cost way more if they do even exist.

From what I can tell, there is no technical upside to using a non-standard resolution (or at least non-standard in the consumer market). Unless you can buy 4096x2160p content, that is, but UHD Bluray is fixed at 3840x2160 and that respresents the highest you can get for consumers. Meaning, this extra resolution is a strict negative, in the sense that you are losing lumens for nothing but paying more for the privilege.

The real reason for true 4K, I believe, is simply a checkbox for bragging rights, and serving the same market of individuals who "need" speaker cables that cost thousands.

This has been a minority report and a public service, thank you for listening. JVC, don't give us useless features, give us 120hz input support at 1080p with HDR and low latency and you will be loved long-time. But no, instead, we get 17:9 aspect ratio chips, 6% of which will never be used except for anamorphic lens users, and even then, at 4K many lenses are not sharp enough to deliver a sharp image, plus 1.25X lenses cost way more than 1.33X lenses and are rarer and harder to find.

And even worse, using a 1.25X lens requires your anamorphic stretch to scale letterbox content both vertically (1600 -> 2160) and horizontally (3840 -> 4096). More scaling is worse than less scaling. This is also a fact.

4096 x 2160p : All kinds of wrong for consumers. But yay, let's offer people useless stuff, it looks great on paper! They probably won't even notice or care that 6% of their lumens are never going to be used.
Andreas21 likes this.
RLBURNSIDE is online now  
post #7 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 09:45 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 6,323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
I don't get why JVC is following Sony down a dead end with true 4K.

4096 x 2160 will deliver an inferior image to 3840 x 2160 in ALL usage scenarios other than with DCI content which cannot be purchased by consumers.

Facts: With UHD Bluray content or streaming UHD content, 99.9999% of which is in 16:9 aspect ratio (3840x2160 or 1920x1080), you should watch it in pillarbox to avoid unnecessary re-scaling which costs sharpness. That's entire point of high res, which is defeated by extra rescaling / resampling steps. This is 100% incontrovertible. Don't do it. Either with UHD or FHD content, stick to 1:1 aspect ratio upscaling for FHD and avoid any scaling whatsoever for UHD content.

Given that true 4K content is basically nil, why the extra 6% of pixels?

Q) Will it cost me anything to just leave those blank? YES : LUMENS. Lumens matter for HDR, and 3D, and even 2D.

Imagine losing 6% of your brightness to project black pillars 100% of the time. This is dumb and wasteful. Do people even sell 17:9 aspect ratio screens? Probably cost way more if they do even exist.

From what I can tell, there is no technical upside to using a non-standard resolution (or at least non-standard in the consumer market). Unless you can buy 4096x2160p content, that is, but UHD Bluray is fixed at 3840x2160 and that respresents the highest you can get for consumers. Meaning, this extra resolution is a strict negative, in the sense that you are losing lumens for nothing but paying more for the privilege.

The real reason for true 4K, I believe, is simply a checkbox for bragging rights, and serving the same market of individuals who "need" speaker cables that cost thousands.

This has been a minority report and a public service, thank you for listening. JVC, don't give us useless features, give us 120hz input support at 1080p with HDR and low latency and you will be loved long-time. But no, instead, we get 17:9 aspect ratio chips, 6% of which will never be used except for anamorphic lens users, and even then, at 4K many lenses are not sharp enough to deliver a sharp image, plus 1.25X lenses cost way more than 1.33X lenses and are rarer and harder to find.

And even worse, using a 1.25X lens requires your anamorphic stretch to scale letterbox content both vertically (1600 -> 2160) and horizontally (3840 -> 4096). More scaling is worse than less scaling. This is also a fact.

4096 x 2160p : All kinds of wrong for consumers. But yay, let's offer people useless stuff, it looks great on paper! They probably won't even notice or care that 6% of their lumens are never going to be used.
Do the chips in these have a commercial application? If so I could see spreading the costs into the consumer space. But otherwise, other than specsmanship, why would they do this?

Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!
anthonymoody is online now  
post #8 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 10:01 AM
Home Theater Lover
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 10,344
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3037 Post(s)
Liked: 2969
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post
when will ALL the technology in this PJ be under $10k?
Well, it's too much a light cannon for my humble HT screen size, currently 130" scope but will grow to 145" scope at next upgrade.
No it's not. It's not too bright for my 128" diagonal 2.35:1 Studiotek 130 or my 122" 16:9 Cima Neve screen. It has brightness modes of 1/3 power, 2/3 power and full power. At 2/3 power, with the DCI color filter, it would put out around 1500 or 1600 lumens. But, that is with the manual iris wide open. For best contrast, you could / should crank that iris down. I'd have to run my RS600 in high lamp to close the iris down more than my current -7 setting. Think of the picture this projector can put out on a screen your size. Off the charts good contrast and bright !

There is no such thing as too bright in my opinion. This might finally be a projector I can consider just bright enough, finally.
llang269 and emergetech like this.

Current home theater photos - http://www.avsforum.com/photopost/sh...hp?cat=2386514

craigpeer@earthlink.net
Craig Peer is offline  
post #9 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 10:03 AM
Home Theater Lover
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 10,344
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3037 Post(s)
Liked: 2969
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post
Do the chips in these have a commercial application? If so I could see spreading the costs into the consumer space. But otherwise, other than specsmanship, why would they do this?
The chips are used in JVC's simulation projectors. So is the laser technology.

Current home theater photos - http://www.avsforum.com/photopost/sh...hp?cat=2386514

craigpeer@earthlink.net
Craig Peer is offline  
post #10 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 10:07 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 6,323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
The chips are used in JVC's simulation projectors. So is the laser technology.
Copy that, thanks.

And agreed about the brightness. I used to feel that 'enough was enough' with my OLED, but then I saw HDR properly demoed on an LCD that was (at least) 2X as bright at peak and was rather stunned. The peak nits ain't about all white/light scenes, it's about the bright highlights in otherwise dark/medium scenes.

Still, at $35k, this one will have to wait

BTW re: not using the 6% of pixels to display a UHD picture at native resolution, does the projector allow for this automagically?

Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!
anthonymoody is online now  
post #11 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 10:46 AM
Home Theater Lover
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 10,344
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3037 Post(s)
Liked: 2969
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post
Copy that, thanks.

And agreed about the brightness. I used to feel that 'enough was enough' with my OLED, but then I saw HDR properly demoed on an LCD that was (at least) 2X as bright at peak and was rather stunned. The peak nits ain't about all white/light scenes, it's about the bright highlights in otherwise dark/medium scenes.

Still, at $35k, this one will have to wait

BTW re: not using the 6% of pixels to display a UHD picture at native resolution, does the projector allow for this automagically?
You invented a new word. I like it ! Can't answer your question, but I'm sure all questions will be answered soon. Hopefully this projector will start shipping soon after CES, which is now less than 2 weeks away.

Current home theater photos - http://www.avsforum.com/photopost/sh...hp?cat=2386514

craigpeer@earthlink.net
Craig Peer is offline  
post #12 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 12:54 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
anthonymoody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: ny, ny usa
Posts: 6,323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 431 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post
You invented a new word. I like it ! Can't answer your question, but I'm sure all questions will be answered soon. Hopefully this projector will start shipping soon after CES, which is now less than 2 weeks away.
I wish I could take credit but I've seen it used in Mac/Apple forum circles to describe the way stuff just works Or at least used to

Agreed on CES. I can't wait, as a new display has my name on it in 2017.

Stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking, nerf herder.
Double True!
anthonymoody is online now  
post #13 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 12:59 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 16,706
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5565 Post(s)
Liked: 3542
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
My screen is on the small side, but low gain. I think HDR will look pretty good. I am wanting to go the HDR route if I can, rather than strip it out.

mjgarrett100@gmail.com

My Baffle wall LCR build: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-di...-tpl-150h.html
Mike Garrett is online now  
post #14 of 15 Old 12-23-2016, 06:50 PM
Home Theater Lover
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 10,344
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3037 Post(s)
Liked: 2969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
My screen is on the small side, but low gain. I think HDR will look pretty good. I am wanting to go the HDR route if I can, rather than strip it out.
It will be interesting to see if this projector handles HDR any different from the RS600. HDR certainly raises black levels on the RS600 - more than I like.

Current home theater photos - http://www.avsforum.com/photopost/sh...hp?cat=2386514

craigpeer@earthlink.net
Craig Peer is offline  
post #15 of 15 Old 12-24-2016, 09:46 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,186
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1540 Post(s)
Liked: 1218
HDR video signals have higher native contrast than SDR + JVC projectors can actually exploit it so it's a natural fit.

Being concerned with the black level rising a small amount because the backlight needs to be higher for HDR is missing the point: HDR video signals allow you to exploit JVC's static contrast ratio more completely.

I can't wait to see these in action! And maybe own one. 2017 is going to be an exciting year for HDR I'm sure.
RLBURNSIDE is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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