Originally Posted by LMitsDLP
So, I guess CNET reviews are garbage then? When they do reviews of lets say WD-65738 or WD-65838, they always say to expect the same performance from the smaller of bigger sets in that model series since they all have the specs. Going by what you and many other experts on this board are saying, this is not true. CNET a reputable review site, don't know what they are saying, if I go with you'll conclusion. Also, if Mitsubishi puts the same lamp in all of their DLP models from 60"-82", that should goes to show that the lamp should perform the same in all sets regardless of screen sizes. They would have some serious lawsuits on their hands if they go around putting lamps that are not suitable for a 82" TV in those sets.
Also, I must add, that the 2010 738 and 838 since those were the two models I viewed, are very much brighter than the previous models. Even the sales person at "The Big Screen Store" said that, when I said to him that these look a lot brighter than the previous models. The viewing from the side is way better also, and I think someone else and even you also mentioned this improvement.
You really are missing the point. While using the settings discovered during the calibration of another similar set may and probably will improve from the out of box calibration it does not reliably produce the same results. It is pointless for me to argue you this with you. If you want to be informed on the subject I suggest you go to the Display Calibrations forum and read the the topics on subject. This is not a personal view, this is the collective knowledge of the industry and the leaders who train THX and ISF calibrators and the people who design meters, measurment software, test disks, and video processors. Again, this entire industry exists to help produce reference quality image reproduction on playback devices.
So to restate, using someone else's setting may may make a marked improvement out of the box, that is not a calibration. In the Service Menu on the Mits is a category called CCA. This stands for color contrast adjustment. These setting are individually set for that particular display by hand at the factory for each set built. Other manufacturers will have similar and usually more in depth factory hand tuned adjustments.
Do you think for a minute that Mits would expose all these setting for you to modify if the same set of settings produced an optimal result on each set they built. Don't you think it would just be easier for them to preset all the calibration information at the factory. What exactly do you think the point is of having all those setting available. They are just not dials and knobs for you to twist to suit your preference. You can of course do that, it is your set. But if you think about it, if there was as little variation between sets as you describe then they would set them to near perfect and that would be the end of the story.
That you asume because the same lamp and basically the same optical engine is used that the correct settings for a single 82" set are right for a 65" set that makes nearly 40 percent more light per cm^2 is almost hysterically funny.
If you want to become informed about the subject I suggest you spend a few months reading in the Display Calibration forum and you read all the beginner how to guides including Kal Palme's Grayscale for Dummies. This is essentially a rewrite of Tom Huffman's basic calibration guide. Huffman is the developer of Chromapure, calibration software than many of us doing our own calibration use.
While there is plenty of disagreement on calbration subjects in the Calibration forum amongst the experts and top calibrators, they agree on much more than they disagree and they would agree completely on the subject of resusing homegrown, or ever pro-grown calibration settings. A particular collection of settings maybe useful as a jumping off point, they do NOT produce results comparable to a properly individually calibrated set.
Individual sets vary enormously despite what you think. You are just not well-informed. Go to the calibrations forum and get yourself some knowledge and argue with them if you need to prove something to somebody. There is no excuse for not becoming better informed if you want to challenge the wisdom of others on a subject you are woefully ill informed about.
While you may have the highest regard for CNET, that is not the case in the display industry or on this forum. CNET is not what they once were and their advice is often more subjective than objective. When they tell you to expect similar characteristics from one product to another, they are speaking in a much more generalized way then you are taking it.