RPCRT Reference Material - Color Decoding - Page 3

Couldn't tell you, my sound still comes through my set.

[That was a joke: it's in Spanish.]

So here's MI:3 in a dark room. Oddly enough, camera's WB on auto, minimal other tweaks, no changes in PhotoShop (i.e., pretty much the way it's supposed to work):



Interesting to compare to my previous shot and BFJ's (sorry, off by a few frames, but it's too late to go through this again).

This is an interesting scene from 2001 (which is FABULOUS in HD, BTW), discussed at some length on the PJ thread. The woman on the left is wearing a purple dress (not black, like the others) with a red collar. The chairs are not red, like the collar, but slightly purple (I believe "mauve" would be accurate, if that means anything to anyone). That's how it looks on screen. If I take the screenshot and increase the brightness substantially (in PS), the colors look closer to what I see on the set.
Nope, this is certainly NOT an exact science.



It is, however, a very effective way to kill a couple of hours.

Michael

I'm missing something, as far as I know both Labyrinth's are in english. Or am I being a tard on Sunday?

Are all these screen shots 480 line SD, where are the 1080i shots?

Mine Post #9 are all 1080i Blu-Ray over HDMI. Unfortunately, Comcast is having issues again!

All I get are red x's instead of your pics Lee...Also your link to your HT is bad...

I rented the SD version from BlockBuster and couldn't get spoken English anywhichway. The title and credits were in Spanish, too. It was still a great movie subtitled, but if the other versions are in English, I may have to add it to my "buy" list. For a minute there, that list was starting to get shorter!

Sorry for the confusion.

The only 480 SD shots I posted are clearly labeled as such, generally to compare to their 1080 HD counterparts. So I don't know which "all these" you mean.

Michael

Hey Owen, all screen shots I've posted are in 1080i via HDMI either HD DVD or Blu Ray

Try it now. Comcast (my ISP), was having issues. Not the first time.

The few of mine reprinted here are 1080i via component.

There are more of mine on the Don't Dump your CRT RPTV! thread.

All are 1080i, most are from my Dish DVR, a few - like the Batman Begins shots - are HD DVD from my A2.

I haven't sent up any 480's at all.


Mr Bob

Okay, I feel better. From DeepDiscount's site:

Pan's Labyrinth [HD DVD]
Actor/Actress: Ivana Baquero , Sergi Lopez , Maribel Verdú
Director: Guillermo Del Toro
Year: 2006
Runtime: 0
Rating: R (MPAA)
Language: Original: Spanish; Subtitled: English
Color: Y
Closed Captioned: N

Added the smilie, obviously. Another one I always wanted to use and never thought I'd have the opportunity.

Ahhhhhhh, I see where the confusion is. I'm talkig about Labyrinth, the older movie with David Bowie, not Pan's Labyrinth. Yeah, that one is in spanish, don't rememer bif the PQ was good or not though.

The reason I asked about the shots being 480i is because they all look too soft.
I know it’s not easy to get good photos of a CRT RPTV but you should be able to do better then most of the shots posted so far.

As can be seen from the meta data from these photos they where taken with a Canon HV20, which is a HD video camera (in still mode) not a fancy still camera.
I used an 80% grey screen from the PC to set the manual white balance of the camera, then let the camera do its thing in a dark room.
No editing has been done, the photos have just been reduced in size and Jpeged.
The Canon works better then my old Nikon 950 still camera, but it still suffers from noise in shadow areas and lacks shadow detail. Color balance is also a little off.

I am curious how much better the shots from a nice digital SLR would look in comparison.

These shots are of my modified 70" Sony SXRD, not a CRT RPTV but my old modified and much tweaked Hitachi 57" CRT RPTV provided similar images.
The SXRD is a non scanning display and therefore much easier to photograph then my old Hitachi. Light distribution across the screen is also significantly better then the Hitachi which tended to show vignetting in the corners when photographed, although it looked fine to the eye.

Nice! Definitely the best shots on this thread -

Have you seen the Screenshot War!!!!!!!! thread? Yours would be a nice addition over there -


Mr Bob

A colleague of mine is giving me a raft of **** over at the SPot, saying that screenshots are BS and that I should be able to take them lickety split, with little or no planning, experimentation, nor time. As if taking screenshots were a very simple thing, and that the time and care I have taken in getting ones I consider good enough to be worthy of posting, mean nothing.

He also says that CRT RPTV is not a worthwhile medium anymore, and that I am in severe denial about several things, among them trying to save it and make it last as long as I - as we all - can. I have mentioned these threads where screenshots are highly respected over here, and others where CRT RPTV tech is also highly respected. He says the only CRT medium worth having is front projection, which at least is some form of agreement between us anyway, I guess, tho I disagree that it is the only CRT medium worth caring about.

When I mentioned the huge numbers of views of such threads over here, he says that I am quoting numbers of views that make them impossible to read.

I would like some help in answering him. Here's the thread, it really heats up on page 2 -


http://www.***************.com/fusio...hp?tid/141139/


Mr Bob

Off topic.....but if you are an HD DVD fan, you might want to grab PAN'S LABYRINTH for it's "collectors item" status (so to speak).

This was the 1st AND last HD DVD to be issued by New Line. When WB announced they were going Blu-only back in January, NL (part of WB -now fully englufed by them) opted to skip big daddy Warner's "HD DVDs 'til May 2008" tack and dump the red format immediately. A few planned NL HD DVDs were immediatley scrapped.

You answered your own (annoying) question.
No, it's not easy to get good photos of a CRT RPTV. That's why we're here, trying to work it out.
I don't know about fancy still cameras, but your video camera cost almost three times what I paid for my still camera. I opted for a strong zoom, no doubt at the expense of other features, so it may not be possible for me to get better pictures. But I'm willing to try.
Of course your Hitachi provided similar images to your SXRD. So does mine. It's getting a PICTURE of it that's hard.
I do want to give credit where credit is due: your pictures do look good and you should definitely check out the Screenshot War thread, which is mostly from projectors. I will try your idea for setting white balance using a computer screen. I tried to set it using the TV but, as you mention, light distribution across the screen is not even and the camera went nuts, so I've been stuck trying to fudge the built-in options.
So plug that old Hitachi in again and see what you can do!
Michael

Unfortunately, even that beautiful SXRD set has become obsolete already!

So is it my crappy at-work monitor that makes anything dark look green, or is that artistic intent?

To me, these shots show just what I can't stand about LCD tech, and yes SXRD is LCD tech, as well as digital sets in general. Not all, but most for me. The colors still look weird and pastel like, and the flesh tones always look just how they look there, it's hard to describe, but there's a similarity to digital flehstones that I'm not a fan of. The scren shots are nice though, I wish I could mint to turn out as clear. But understand, what I see at home and what I have been able to get on screen are not even close. My set is nowhere near soft, although my shots are. And my colors I get on pics are not accurate.

My goodness... do you have a technical contribution to the thread or are you just bored at work?

The point, if I remember correctly, was to illustrate scenes that people can use to check the image on their screens. Not necessarily to use mine, but to find those scenes in Shakespeare in Love and see how they look on THEIR set. Get the movie, fire it up and work, and see if, perhaps, your monitor IS crappy.
The whole point here is to figure out how to get better screenshots of RPCRT's. So those shots are not meant to be used as reference images themselves.
Michael

Mano a Mano (1930)
Cast: Carlos Gardel

Is it out in HD?

haha I suppose the question was whether this is endemic to the movie or someone's display.


Do you not have the same issue?

My "technical contribution" is a legitimate question regarding the movie or the display. I suppose I should have consulted your mandatory checklist of appropriate responses first.

Retired...
Nothing better to do than read your continual condescending remarks and self patronizing.

EDIT:
Or as you used to state: All up in yo bidness.

I know my 480 line comment was cheeky, but I did not mean to cause offense.
My Canon video camera may have cost more then many still cameras, but it's a HD video camera it should cost more. What matters is that its performance as a still camera is nothing stellar. Better then a 9 year old 2 mega pixel Nikon 950 is not a big recommendation, color accuracy is not a strong point of the Canon.
Without color correction in Photoshop it's not possible to get accurate color representation with my old Nikon or the Canon and I expect that's the case with most cameras.

Your Panasonic Lumix is doing a good job of capturing the dynamic range of the TV, which as Bob has mentioned can be problematic. Shadow detail and noise are also looking good, it's only clarity and color saturation that's seems to be lacking.
You may need to lower Gamma in Photoshop to get an image with more apparent contrast and punch. Both my cameras produce images with excessively suppressed Gamma, which gives good apparent contrast, but does nothing for shadow detail.
It's not cheating to use Photoshop to do image correction if required, without it you are never likely to get an accurate representation of what you see.


I know my 480 line comment was cheeky, but I did not mean to cause offense.
My Canon video camera may have cost more then many still cameras, but it's a HD video camera it should cost more. What matters is that its performance as a still camera is nothing stellar. Better then a 9 year old 2 mega pixel Nikon 950 is not a big recommendation, color accuracy is not a strong point of the Canon.
Without color correction in Photoshop it's not possible to get accurate color representation with my old Nikon or the Canon and I expect that's the case with most cameras.

Your Panasonic Lumix is doing a good job of capturing the dynamic range of the TV, which as Bob has mentioned can be problematic. Shadow detail and noise are also looking good, it's only clarity and color saturation that's seems to be lacking.
You may need to lower Gamma in Photoshop to get an image with more apparent contrast and punch. Both my cameras produce images with excessively suppressed Gamma, which gives good apparent contrast, but does nothing for shadow detail.
It's not cheating to use Photoshop to do image correction, without it you are never going to get an accurate representation.

Judging color from a non color corrected screen shot on what is probably a non calibrated monitor (LCD?) is presumptuous.
What makes you think the color in my shots is in any way more representative of what I see then your screen shots are of what you see?

Thankfully the SXRD’s color reproduction has nothing at all in common with LCD panels, if it did I would have never purchased it.
The only CRT display I have seen that competes with the SXRD for color is my color calibrated Sony G500 21” PC monitor with very low hours that I use for a reference. My Hitachi CRT RPTV and 36” HD direct view CRT TV never could, even after two years of tweaking. Not only that but the SXRD exhibits remarkably less noise, posterisation (color banding) and digital artifacts then my Hitachi CRT RPTV. Color resolution is FAR superior on the SXRD, its one of its greatest assets.