Leyard TWA0.9 LED Video Wall at CEDIA 2017 - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 28Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 105 Old 09-19-2017, 05:41 PM
AVS Forum Club Gold
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 22,912
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked: 509
Darin,
Thanks for the post glad to see you posting again.


Art
darinp and ARROW-AV like this.

...
Art Sonneborn is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 105 Old 09-20-2017, 08:24 AM
Newbie
 
J`eremySt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
If you can tell us the approximate contrast ratio you can do between a white pixel and a black background on the same panel in a room without other lighting (black room or white room is pretty close to irrelevant), that would be great.

Thanks,
Darin
Infinite. Any amount of light measured against 0 nits is infinite contrast.

Regarding the Sony's 1million to one contrast... Sony used Micro LED, which is a different technology. Significantly more spendy per meter than our .9 walls. One disadvantage of using small LEDs is that the closer you get to the display it will be easier to see the individual pixels, plus I assume the LEDs cannot be replaced if they are damaged. Using small LEDs will increase the "real life" contrast, since the non-LED area can be made very black. But publishing one million to one is a weird number: they could have used infinity to one if they are talking about dark room contrast, so why sop at 1 million to one?

If its a a real life contrast number, still weird...
  • at 1M to one, and assuming 1000 nits for the white areas, that means the blacks (including reflected light) are 0.001 nits
  • if we assume a 50 lux environment (typical of household tv watching) than 50 lux equates to 16 nits at the display surface
  • if only 0.001 nits of the 16 nits are reflected that means the displays reflectitivity is 0.006%-- which is hard to believe


All of this should support my earlier statement that published specs are all a bit of a "marketing game".
ARROW-AV likes this.

Leyard, Planar
Technical Marketing, Field Application, Installer, all around video nerd
J`eremySt is offline  
post #63 of 105 Old 09-20-2017, 08:27 AM
Newbie
 
J`eremySt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post
3000:1 for the finest pitches and 5000:1 for the somewhat less fine upanels, is what the brochure I was shown said on the Unilumins.

So $200K dealer price. Does that include the dealer suppport Leyard has been offering, basicaly design assistance and installation?
50% margin is not typical in the video world, so im not sure where you got that number. design assistance yes, installation, usually not. thankfully im not in sales, so you can work that out with our sales team.
ARROW-AV likes this.

Leyard, Planar
Technical Marketing, Field Application, Installer, all around video nerd
J`eremySt is offline  
 
post #64 of 105 Old 09-20-2017, 11:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darinp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,511
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 386 Post(s)
Liked: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
Infinite. Any amount of light measured against 0 nits is infinite contrast.
Thanks. If the display can do zero nits on part of one of the individual panels at the same time as it does 600 nits on another part of the same panel (like OLED basically can) that is great and I think you should spec that it can do that.

The 6000:1 doesn't seem to be telling us anything, especially if it is just that somebody choose some random amount of lights to turn on in the room before measuring the display.
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
Regarding the Sony's 1million to one contrast... Sony used Micro LED, which is a different technology. Significantly more spendy per meter than our .9 walls. One disadvantage of using small LEDs is that the closer you get to the display it will be easier to see the individual pixels, plus I assume the LEDs cannot be replaced if they are damaged. Using small LEDs will increase the "real life" contrast, since the non-LED area can be made very black.
From your answer of "infinite" it sounds like your display can make the non-white pixels black not far from that white (on the same panel). I'm not sure if I was clear that by "one panel" I meant one of the small individual blocks that make up your large display.
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
But publishing one million to one is a weird number: they could have used infinity to one if they are talking about dark room contrast, so why sop at 1 million to one?
My guess is they thought people might not believe them, even if they can do it. They might not have wanted to get confused with displays that can turn the whole display off for black, but have to raise the black level a bunch if there is even a single white pixel in the image, which the Sony shouldn't have to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
  • at 1M to one, and assuming 1000 nits for the white areas, that means the blacks (including reflected light) are 0.001 nits
  • if we assume a 50 lux environment (typical of household tv watching) than 50 lux equates to 16 nits at the display surface
  • if only 0.001 nits of the 16 nits are reflected that means the displays reflectitivity is 0.006%-- which is hard to believe
I agree that Sony's number is extremely unlikely to be with room lights on.

For a display in the middle of a mall I think "real world" includes the lights that they would have on, but for consumer displays I don't consider having room lights on any more "real world" than having room lights off. A strong argument can be made that black surfaces on the whole room are less real world, but I think plenty of people would be happy watching their display at night in a non-black room with the room lights off, if the display is up to it.

Also, I don't consider contrast ratios like ANSI CR that are measured with white and black separated in space any more "real world" than contrast ratios like on/off CR that measure white and black separated in time. Both relate in real ways to the content which we watch and both are extreme tests. Neither is even close to average content for single frames of real content, but lots of content has white pixels and all black frames at some point during the say hour plus that a person watches them, which is one reason that on/off CR is relevant to real content in real rooms even though it isn't an intra-image contrast ratio.

--Darin
ARROW-AV likes this.
darinp is offline  
post #65 of 105 Old 09-20-2017, 01:46 PM
Newbie
 
J`eremySt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
Thanks. If the display can do zero nits on part of one of the individual panels at the same time as it does 600 nits on another part of the same panel (like OLED basically can) that is great and I think you should spec that it can do that.

--Darin
to my knowledge, any DVLED will have full on/off with adjacent pixels. In other words, if one pixel is all full white, the one right next to it can be off. Thus the intra field contrast would be the same as full on full off.
ARROW-AV likes this.

Leyard, Planar
Technical Marketing, Field Application, Installer, all around video nerd
J`eremySt is offline  
post #66 of 105 Old 09-20-2017, 11:53 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
This is a common misconception in the industry. It doesn't hold up to basic math. What matters here is whether you have other lighting. If you have white walls they could reflect even 10% of the light back to the screen and the on/off CR would be the same. 1.1x/1.1y is exactly the same as x/y and blackouts are relevant to white rooms also. ANSI CR is affected by room reflections, but unless there is some other issue (like lights on or light streaming through windows) on/off CR is basically not.
Precisely. Envronmental reflections raise both the black and white levels but the contrast ratio remains the same. It's the same as if/when you stack two projectors you double both the black level and white level but the contrast ratio remains the same. It amazes me how this is so often misunderstood. This is one of the reasons why we argue against focusing solely on native contrast ratios, when you really need to consider the whole picture (excuse the pun).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
Darin,
...glad to see you posting again.

Art
+1 what he said ^^^

Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
That makes me think they can't actually do more than 3k:1 between a white pixel and a black background on the same panel. Otherwise they should spec things higher and say it is a form of on/off CR... If your display can do significantly higher than 6k:1 between a white pixel and a black background on just one of the panels in a room without other lighting then I think you should specify that. If it can't then I understand only specifying that much.

JVC has done a pretty good job getting some people to understand native on/off CR, IMO. At least around here.

If you can tell us the approximate contrast ratio you can do between a white pixel and a black background on the same panel in a room without other lighting (black room or white room is pretty close to irrelevant), that would be great.

Thanks,
Darin
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
Infinite. Any amount of light measured against 0 nits is infinite contrast.

Regarding the Sony's 1million to one contrast... Sony used Micro LED, which is a different technology. Significantly more spendy per meter than our .9 walls. One disadvantage of using small LEDs is that the closer you get to the display it will be easier to see the individual pixels, plus I assume the LEDs cannot be replaced if they are damaged. Using small LEDs will increase the "real life" contrast, since the non-LED area can be made very black. But publishing one million to one is a weird number: they could have used infinity to one if they are talking about dark room contrast, so why sop at 1 million to one?

If its a a real life contrast number, still weird...
  • at 1M to one, and assuming 1000 nits for the white areas, that means the blacks (including reflected light) are 0.001 nits
  • if we assume a 50 lux environment (typical of household tv watching) than 50 lux equates to 16 nits at the display surface
  • if only 0.001 nits of the 16 nits are reflected that means the displays reflectitivity is 0.006%-- which is hard to believe

All of this should support my earlier statement that published specs are all a bit of a "marketing game".
I think the reason why SONY with respect to its CLEDIS (MicroLED) technology believes it is able to report 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio has something to do with the fact that the emmissive component is only 1% of the total pixel area wherein 99% of the pixel area is black.

The perceived black levels are a sight to behold but it comes at a price, a very high price, in fact multiple/several times the price of DVLEDs including the Leyard. Which is almost certainly due to the comparatively very high cost of manufacturing MicroLED at the present time... which unfortunately for customers isn't something which is likely to reduce in price anytime soon. Consequently, we view the likes of SONY's CLEDIS as being akin to the Sony BVM-X300 professional broadcast monitor, in that this is used as a reference standard for comparison purposes when evaluating the performance of consumer TVs, but nobody actually purchases it for use as a TV. In the same way, we consider SONY's CLEDIS to represent a leading edge comparative reference standard, as opposed to something which anyone is likely to actually purchase for domestic use... at least until the price comes down, which probably won't be for quite a while..

For this reason we think there's very much a market for high quality DVLEDs with respect to the high-end home theater/cinema industry. Where I think the main competition will be the larger sized singular OLED panels that LG will commence manufacturing imminently, as opposed to superior but oppressively expensive next generation emmissive display technologies like MicroLED. That said, DVLEDs do offer some advantages as compared with OLED.

Either way, we are extremely interested in the potential of DVLEDs for domestic usage. We would love to have a wall installed into our new demonstration and experience centre sometime soon.


Last edited by ARROW-AV; 09-21-2017 at 12:02 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #67 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 12:08 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
50% margin is not typical in the video world...
True... unfortunately!!! A good friend of mine's favourite expression is "for AV dealer's there's no money in video!" so we're hoping the margin won't be as lousy as with respect to consumer TVs!
.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #68 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 01:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
donaldk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,936
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
50% margin is not typical in the video world, so im not sure where you got that number. design assistance yes, installation, usually not. thankfully im not in sales, so you can work that out with our sales team.
Depends on the part of the video industry, you guys are packing up from IBC, for instance in that segment of Video traditionally the margins were 50%. Some other distributors also offered me 50% of list. In HiFi on the otherhand it used to be MSRP=300% of ex-factory. In all these segments margins are under pressure, so

And yes I was fishing for LED industry margins;-), so my prying mind is well diverted Jeremy;-).

As for big figure list prices two years ago your sales people told me $42K per M2, so no drop there, as 168" diagonal is approximately 10M2. Unless that was for 1.2 not the 0.9, would need to check my notes if i really wanted to know.
donaldk is offline  
post #69 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 02:18 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post
Depends on the part of the video industry, you guys are packing up from IBC, for instance in that segment of Video traditionally the margins were 50%. Some other distributors also offered me 50% of list. In HiFi on the otherhand it used to be MSRP=300% of ex-factory. In all these segments margins are under pressure, so

And yes I was fishing for LED industry margins;-), so my prying mind is well diverted Jeremy;-).

As for big figure list prices two years ago your sales people told me $42K per M2, so no drop there, as 168" diagonal is approximately 10M2. Unless that was for 1.2 not the 0.9, would need to check my notes if i really wanted to know.
Donald you are correct that high-end video products usually have higher margins as compared with typical; where this is clearly a high-end product. Additionally, there is significantly more involved with respect to installation by A/V dealers as compared with the likes of TVs for example; wherein it's clearly CI only... So It's appropriate that these have a higher margin accordingly... At least that's what I'm hoping... Jeremy I'm winking at you right now


Last edited by ARROW-AV; 09-21-2017 at 02:22 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #70 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 02:45 AM
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 17,735
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2273 Post(s)
Liked: 1296
Send a message via Skype™ to CINERAMAX
cledis is 30 points margin. You are smoking at the cafe's again Donald?
ARROW-AV likes this.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #71 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 03:14 PM
Newbie
 
J`eremySt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Precisely. Envronmental reflections raise both the black and white levels but the contrast ratio remains the same. It's the same as if/when you stack two projectors you double both the black level and white level but the contrast ratio remains the same. It amazes me how this is so often misunderstood. This is one of the reasons why we argue against focusing solely on native contrast ratios, when you really need to consider the whole picture (excuse the pun).
You lost me. Youll have to explain how environmental reflections raise the white level of display in a way that substantially effects white level or luminance. Yes, double stacking projectors would double lightoutput without effecting contrast too much, but ambient light on a screen can destroy black level, reducing contrast, without making any noticeable difference to peak white level or luminance. shining a flashlight on a DVLED or projector screen can cut black level in half. It will not double white level or luminace, or even raise it by 25% so that math doesnt add up.

With regard to margin, ill leave that for when you have a discussion with our sales team.
ARROW-AV likes this.

Leyard, Planar
Technical Marketing, Field Application, Installer, all around video nerd
J`eremySt is offline  
post #72 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 04:19 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 14,209
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3454 Post(s)
Liked: 2524
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
I think the reason why SONY with respect to its CLEDIS (MicroLED) technology believes it is able to report 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio has something to do with the fact that the emmissive component is only 1% of the total pixel area wherein 99% of the pixel area is black.
I hope they're not really that stupid, but I wouldn't it past 'em.
Stereodude is offline  
post #73 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 04:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darinp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,511
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 386 Post(s)
Liked: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
shining a flashlight on a DVLED or projector screen can cut black level in half. It will not double white level or luminace, or even raise it by 25% so that math doesnt add up.
Reflections and other light sources have completely different math. I've tried explaining this to some people who are supposed to be experts about contrast ratio in the industry and they still had trouble understanding it (while some others didn't seem to have any trouble understanding it), but I'll try to explain here. I'll simplify though.

Pick any percentage of reflections you want and the on/off CR will stay the same if the only source of light is the display (I'm not counting light spewing out the vents from projectors and hitting white walls before hitting the screen).

Say you have a super reflective room that reflects 20% of the light back and off a reflective surface. The full white image will go up by 20% and the full black image will go up by 20%. Since 1.2x/1.2y we still get the same on/off CR, which is x/y.

Add a constant light source and things are completely different. Instead of affecting white and black by the same ratio this other light source overwhelms the black level, but not the white level. So, turn lights on and the system on/off CR goes down significantly from the display's on/off CR.

ANSI CR is another matter. Here there is a 4x4 checkerboard of white and black. Both room reflections and other light sources will affect the black more than the white, so both issues make ANSI CR go down.

With just room reflections as the problem the white in the ANSI CR checkerboards will affect the black. One of the nice things about on/off CR is that the white only affects the white and the black only affects the black.

If you want to know about average images which are neither as extreme as the ANSI CR test or the on/off CR test then you can gain some knowledge of the black pedestal (before dynamic dimming) from the on/off CR test and the amount of washout from the ANSI CR test. Simplifying again, if you have an image that is only 1/4th as bright as the ANSI CR test then the washout from the bright parts of the image to the dark parts should be about 1/4th of what it is for the ANSI CR test.

--Darin
darinp is offline  
post #74 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 07:41 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
You lost me. Youll have to explain how environmental reflections raise the white level of display in a way that substantially effects white level or luminance. Yes, double stacking projectors would double lightoutput without effecting contrast too much, but ambient light on a screen can destroy black level, reducing contrast, without making any noticeable difference to peak white level or luminance. shining a flashlight on a DVLED or projector screen can cut black level in half. It will not double white level or luminace, or even raise it by 25% so that math doesnt add up.
Happy to clarify for you. An environmental light source that's a constant reflection or reflection otherwise (e.g. not just light walls and/or ceiling but also reflective items such as a white table light shade ), because it's constant will add to the luminance of both full field black and full field white and everything inbetween. Consequently, the contrast ratio, namely the ratio between luminance of full field white and luminance of full field black remains the same, but both the black level and white level are elevated by the environmental light source. In short, this is where environmental light can ruin the black floor, but does not in fact alter the Contrast Ratio. Math explanation as per follows... Contrast Ratio = W / B. Let's say there is a 5% elevation of luminance due to environmental light sources, in which case Contrast Ratio = 1.05 W / 1.05 B = W / B = THE SAME --> Q.E.D.

Similarly, when stacking two projectors, let's say for example with each projector full field white measures as 100 nits and full field black measures as 0.005 nits. Therefore, Contrast Ratio of singular projector = 100 / 0.005 = 20,000:1. With respect to two projectors stacked, the full field white doubles to 200 nits and full field black also doubles to 0.01 nits. Therefore, Contrast Ratio of the two projectors stacked = 200 / 0.01 = 20,000:1 = THE SAME --> Q.E.D.



Quote:
Originally Posted by J`eremySt View Post
With regard to margin, ill leave that for when you have a discussion with our sales team.

Last edited by ARROW-AV; 09-22-2017 at 02:43 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #75 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 07:43 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
Reflections and other light sources have completely different math. I've tried explaining this to some people who are supposed to be experts about contrast ratio in the industry and they still had trouble understanding it (while some others didn't seem to have any trouble understanding it), but I'll try to explain here. I'll simplify though.

Pick any percentage of reflections you want and the on/off CR will stay the same if the only source of light is the display (I'm not counting light spewing out the vents from projectors and hitting white walls before hitting the screen).

Say you have a super reflective room that reflects 20% of the light back and off a reflective surface. The full white image will go up by 20% and the full black image will go up by 20%. Since 1.2x/1.2y we still get the same on/off CR, which is x/y.

Add a constant light source and things are completely different. Instead of affecting white and black by the same ratio this other light source overwhelms the black level, but not the white level. So, turn lights on and the system on/off CR goes down significantly from the display's on/off CR.

ANSI CR is another matter. Here there is a 4x4 checkerboard of white and black. Both room reflections and other light sources will affect the black more than the white, so both issues make ANSI CR go down.

With just room reflections as the problem the white in the ANSI CR checkerboards will affect the black. One of the nice things about on/off CR is that the white only affects the white and the black only affects the black.

If you want to know about average images which are neither as extreme as the ANSI CR test or the on/off CR test then you can gain some knowledge of the black pedestal (before dynamic dimming) from the on/off CR test and the amount of washout from the ANSI CR test. Simplifying again, if you have an image that is only 1/4th as bright as the ANSI CR test then the washout from the bright parts of the image to the dark parts should be about 1/4th of what it is for the ANSI CR test.

--Darin
Lol! You beat me to it!

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #76 of 105 Old 09-21-2017, 08:24 PM
Newbie
 
J`eremySt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
turn lights on and the system on/off CR goes down significantly from the display's on/off CR.

--Darin
I see what youre saying now. I misunderstood. This is the point i was trying to make.
ARROW-AV likes this.

Leyard, Planar
Technical Marketing, Field Application, Installer, all around video nerd
J`eremySt is offline  
post #77 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 01:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darinp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,511
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 386 Post(s)
Liked: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
An environmental light source that's constant whether a reflection or otherwise (e.g. a table light), because it's constant will add to the luminance of both full field black and full field white and everything inbetween. Consequently, the contrast ratio, namely the ratio between luminance of full field white and luminance of full field black remains the same,
Not sure if you meant to say that, but you lost me on the table lamp example. A reflective source (like a white shade on a table lamp) won't hurt the system on/off CR, but a table lamp that is turned on will.

--Darin
ARROW-AV likes this.
darinp is offline  
post #78 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 02:41 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp View Post
Not sure if you meant to say that, but you lost me on the table lamp example. A reflective source (like a white shade on a table lamp) won't hurt the system on/off CR, but a table lamp that is turned on will.

--Darin
To clarify I am solely referring to reflective sources... not referring to emissive light sources... I've said this previously ^^^^ and talking about all-lights-off-environments with ambient light reflections... I shouldn't have said 'otherwise' good catch Darin! [EDIT: I've fixed my post ^^^]


Last edited by ARROW-AV; 09-22-2017 at 02:44 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #79 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 06:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
donaldk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,936
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Light from the screen is generally not referred to as ambient light.
donaldk is offline  
post #80 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 07:25 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by donaldk View Post
Light from the screen is generally not referred to as ambient light.
Ambient light levels do not refer to emissive light sources but describes the summation of environmental reflected light and yes that relates to light from the screen, at least it does here in England

In fact here you go:

Ambient lighting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"It is the combination of light reflections from various surfaces to produce a uniform illumination called the ambient light."

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #81 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 07:41 AM
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 17,735
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2273 Post(s)
Liked: 1296
Send a message via Skype™ to CINERAMAX
screen light in unity gain screens sprays light everywhere it is not wanted, flatscreens have more directional lighting creating their own shadowbox.

Whomever decided to use unity gain screens needs their head examined IN THE NEW WORLD of HDR, where directional lighting to an intimate audience is what is best for image immersion, but if you have more than 4 seats to a row, then you are destroying the around your head envelopment potential for ATMOS.

So once you are in a 3-4 seater micro cinema, then you need the light sent just to those eyes, anything else is light pollution.
ARROW-AV likes this.
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #82 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 08:00 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post
screen light in unity gain screens sprays light everywhere it is not wanted, flatscreens have more directional lighting creating their own shadowbox.

Whomever decided to use unity gain screens needs their head examined IN THE NEW WORLD of HDR, where directional lighting to an intimate audience is what is best for image immersion, but if you have more than 4 seats to a row, then you are destroying the around your head envelopment potential for ATMOS.

So once you are in a 3-4 seater micro cinema, then you need the light sent just to those eyes, anything else is light pollution.
Is this you Peter?



Seriously though, check this out if you haven't seen it already (it's amusing):

Meet Cinera, A 5K Headset That Places IMAX Quality Right In Your Face



Last edited by ARROW-AV; 09-23-2017 at 07:21 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #83 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 09:05 AM
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 17,735
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2273 Post(s)
Liked: 1296
Send a message via Skype™ to CINERAMAX
I am in, but they need more rubineque models, like so:



Me 30 pounds heavier listening to Fraunhofer Cingo 3D.

I told the ceo they needed to do research on their naming situations, that in Cuban Cingo sounds exactly like pretense verb to copulate. Singo.

He was embarrassed the distinguished bavarian gentleman. He agreed it was a major faux pas.

I sure play mean pinball!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg I play Mean Pinball.jpg (2.73 MB, 120 views)
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #84 of 105 Old 09-22-2017, 05:00 PM
 
CINERAMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 17,735
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2273 Post(s)
Liked: 1296
Send a message via Skype™ to CINERAMAX
got a call fr4om SONY

only six rental and staging firms get to sell it. They are not interested in mass app. The dmoe units are in silicon Valley, for Google and Apple, and the second unit is going in Austin Texas for Dell?

The market is wide open for led smd screens.

They are intrigued by my Dolby PH concept the beauty and purity of it ...


led walls require a great view to widen your gaze..
CINERAMAX is offline  
post #85 of 105 Old 09-23-2017, 03:10 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
mhafner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 4,853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Is this you Peter?



Seriously though, check this out if you haven't seen it already:

Meet Cinera, A 5K Headset That Places IMAX Quality Right In Your Face


This not 5K. Not even 3K. And at the price point nothing high end anyway. Not fit for UHD as well since no HDMI 2.1. I'll be interested once they have OLED versions with 4K for each eye.
mhafner is offline  
post #86 of 105 Old 09-23-2017, 04:57 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 14,209
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3454 Post(s)
Liked: 2524
The the same people who insist 3D failed because people didn't like to wear light glasses think people are going to wear heavy cumbersome headsets?
Stereodude is offline  
post #87 of 105 Old 09-23-2017, 05:48 AM
Member
 
AnalogHD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Seriously though, check this out if you haven't seen it already:
Meet Cinera, A 5K Headset That Places IMAX Quality Right In Your Face
Since when is 1440p "5K"?

And if it is, is a 5120x2880 120Hz monitor used with 3D glasses 10K?
AnalogHD is offline  
post #88 of 105 Old 09-23-2017, 07:04 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post
This not 5K. Not even 3K. And at the price point nothing high end anyway. Not fit for UHD as well since no HDMI 2.1. I'll be interested once they have OLED versions with 4K for each eye.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
The the same people who insist 3D failed because people didn't like to wear light glasses think people are going to wear heavy cumbersome headsets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogHD View Post
Since when is 1440p "5K"? And if it is, is a 5120x2880 120Hz monitor used with 3D glasses 10K?
Guys, just to be crystal clear... We posted that as a JOKE and secondarily only as a point of possible mild interest, not because we think this product is any good but because it's kinda interesting to follow the ongoing development of technology, and that includes things like VR, drones, Video Headsets and the like... So just to be clear, we have absolutely no interest in this product and won't be promoting it or marketing it... And no, it's not 5K... And for what it's worth we don't envisage HT being taken over by everyone switching to enjoying movies video headsets with headphones anytime soon

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #89 of 105 Old 09-23-2017, 07:17 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,349
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked: 1264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
The the same people who insist 3D failed because people didn't like to wear light glasses think people are going to wear heavy cumbersome headsets?
Firstly, if you are referring to us then you are either misinformed or taking what we've said out of context... Wherein, in fact to set the record straight, our perspective as to why 3D has not been more successful at the present time is due to a combination of factors, only one of which is the need to don glasses, but others include other influencing factors such as the potential for cross-talk, eye strain, image luminance and/or resolution reduction (depending on the equipment and format) as well as other technological performance flaws and aspects that are suboptimal and/or which can be improved but with respect to which there's not currently the support (unfortunately) such as all of HFR, native 4K and HDR into each eye etc. etc.

Secondly, did 3D actually fail? It is our understanding that 3D was and is a niche market that still has pretty much the same small but significant following, especially by some home theater/cinema enthusiasts... many of whom have openingly complained regarding some new model TVs dropping support for 3D such as the new model LG OLEDs where LG has dropped the 3D support in favour of increasing the peak luminance performance.


Last edited by ARROW-AV; 09-23-2017 at 07:24 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #90 of 105 Old 09-23-2017, 10:51 AM
Member
 
AnalogHD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 91
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 54
They overhyped 3D on hardware that can't do it right, so here's the backlash... now it seems that people actively don't want a 3D TV, so manufacturers remove it with a reason or without.
AnalogHD is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

Tags
cedia 2017 , led video wall , leyard

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