We at Runco would like to thank you for the generally positive review. I personally spent two years working on the Q-750 and am happy to see that some of its unique attributes impressed you. However, my team is a little concerned about some of the "grumbles" that you found, and would like an opportunity to try to offer some explanations of our philosophy as well as some corrections for the review.
First, I'd like to address the complaint about the brightness of the product. As you may be new to Runco products and the CSMS (Cinema Standards Measuring System) rating system we use, I want to explain exactly how it works. There are 2 lumens measurements on our spec sheets. The first, and the one that is probably the most meaningful to you, is the ANSI brightness measured with the projector calibrated to the home theater or CSMS standards. This rating according to our spec sheet is 450 lumens, which is a number I measured myself on an average unit and is pretty close to what you measured. The second number, which you quote as our "claim" of 700 lumens is actually only intended as a guide for comparison to other manufacturers' numbers and is not really meant to represent anything meaningful in the home. This number is a direct result of the trend towards poorly measured or exaggerated claims, and putting us into the same category as other manufacturers who can't meet their numbers is very frustrating to us when we're actually trying to correct the system. For your information, a so-called "1000 lumen" projector that you rated higher than ours was measured by Home Theater Magazine at 606 lumens in its brightest mode, and the manufacturer doesn't state anywhere to my knowledge how many lumens you'll really get when you set it up right. We're trying to change all that, and for more information on CSMS see http://www.runco.com/magic/csms-information/
. I hope that you can help to spread the word about accurately reporting real-world specifications instead of hype.
Secondly, it appears that there is an error associated with your Personal Color Equalizer (PCE) settings that we feel contributed to some of your perceptions about color accuracy. It appears that although you used the CIE 1931 xyY color space for adjusting the PCE values, you adjusted the x,y values (using hue and saturation) but not the Y values (using level). Doing this from the default settings to try to get to BT.709 (the HDTV color standard) will result in colors that are too bright, and in some cases (red, for example) much too bright. The reason for this is the non-linear response your vision has to saturated colors otherwise known as the Helmholtz-Kohlrausch effect. Saturated colors appear brighter than non-saturated colors. This is the reason highly saturated objects appear to glow in most displays that have a larger color gamut than the capture device. Therefore if you want to make the color gamut significantly smaller then you also need to drop the brightness of the colors as well. This issue could explain some of the color artifacts you saw, even in dark scenes since color brightness and saturation are two separate things.
For your reference, here are the settings we would suggest to achieve BT.709 using the PCE. These settings were developed using a spectroradiometer and a NIST certified target. Since the viewing environment does have an impact (screens vary in the color of white more than our projectors do), these should only be considered a starting point. Note that we have published a reviewer's guide that contains this information and more. Please PM me if you would like a copy.
PCE settings for BT.709 (numbers are hue, saturation, level)
r: 125, 96, 71
y: 77, 85, 100
g: 48, 87, 92
c: 123, 48, 98
b: 82, 96, 95
m: 48, 80, 114
Once you set the level correctly for each color and get the x,y value right, there should be no perceptible color difference between the Q-750 and a reference BT.709 projector. The reds, for example, should not appear any more "intense and convincing" than any other well calibrated, BT.709 display.
This leads to our next recommendation that you at least try the Runco "Native" color gamut setting, since you (and most casual viewers) seem to prefer intense colors, and we believe they do have their place. The "Native" preset uses the entire available color gamut achievable with the LED illumination, allowing for about 90% more colors than BT.709 contains. But rather than simply mapping the colors directly to the larger gamut, we do everything in our power to make BT.709 sources look as correct as possible. This includes adjusting the secondary color points to better match the source, doing a 3D remap of colors close to skin tones, which otherwise would appear sunburned, pushing them back toward the BT.709 values (we call this Runco Smart Color or RSC), and making sure the color brightness does not cause the "neon" or glowing look for saturated colors. Once you do all this the results are quite compelling for sources that you would want to be represented in a greater color space than the standards allow such as outdoor events, concerts, and animation. I think that if you enjoy the "motion enhancement" frame interpolation of modern televisions, then you should at least appreciate the effort we went to here to try to put back something else that can sometimes be lost in the mastering.
I'd also like to ask about some of the trouble you seemed to have. Specifically, two items:
1) Have you contacted Runco about the trouble you were having with 1080i? 1080i through YUV inputs is supported, and is clearly shown in the manual. We test both flavors of 1080i50 (EU and Australia) and have not had any reported problems that could not be resolved. Have you tried setting the sync level in the fine sync menu? DC restoration is imperfect in many consumer sources, and often this control, which manually adjusts the sync detection threshold, fixes sync issues with analog sources.
2) Could you provide some detail about what you felt was "impractical" about the lens shift? I cannot find any details in the review. We've got +/-120% vertical and +/-25% horizontal lens shift (percent of half height/width, i.e. 0=centered, 100=lens at top or bottom of screen). It's more than most. I was wondering if maybe our nomenclature was again the issue. In our installation guide we define the shift in terms of screen heights/widths because it's easier for the installer to calculate where the screen goes. But this results in numbers that look like half of what others report in their specs.
To me it's all about numbers, but part of my job is communicating to anyone who needs to know what those numbers really mean. I apologize for not getting you more information before this review was made, but our team was unaware that it was going to press when it did. Please let me know if you have any questions about this product (or any other Runco product for that matter), or if you have suggestions to help make our documentation clearer.
Chief Product Architect, Runco Internationalwww.runco.com