Official LaserVue Owners thread - Page 7

Originally Posted by Lucifer1977

I would suggest nobody purchase this TV. They have stopped production.

Originally Posted by Ninerdude

The purpose of the release of the unit was to keep the numbers small, sort of "beta" test it in the field. The new generation launches in June after they feel they have worked out the kinks.

Originally Posted by Ninerdude

The purpose of the release of the unit was to keep the numbers small, sort of "beta" test it in the field. The new generation launches in June after they feel they have worked out the kinks.

Originally Posted by ordo

recently saw the laservue at a ken crane's. it was between a 65 and 73 inch "regular" diamond dlp sets by mitsubishi. these were the 835 series and not the "new ones" recently released. these were not professionally calibrated but the mitsubishi reps had just left the store and the salesman said that they did do some tweeking of all the sets. the bottom line was that two salesmen plus myself could see (hd signal espn, and others) very little difference in picture quality. (a bit better colors on the laser) my question is did anyone else have the ability to see these sets matched up this way and if so what was your impression of picture quality. obviously there was a "big big" difference in price and all three of us thought that even the larger 73 inch was as good as the laser...

Originally Posted by rickdeckard123

Just saw the laservue at Ovation in Indianapolis. Picture was incredible. They had Indiana Jones playing on bluray and the color was fantastic. Contrary to what I have read, blacks were very inky and deep-similar to my 8th generation Kuro. I would buy one right away if they would drop the price.

Originally Posted by nicholc2

Scientific lab testing, no. However, I recently calibrated a Laservue and here are the before/after results:

Before in dynamic mode:
0IRE - 0.012 ftL
100IRE - 77.846 ftL
Avg gamma - 1.34
Contrast 6644:1 (on/off, not ANSI)

Originally Posted by nicholc2

Scientific lab testing, no. However, I recently calibrated a Laservue and here are the before/after results:

Before in dynamic mode:
0IRE ......

Originally Posted by coltsfreak18

What plasma models would have black levels similar to that?

Didn't the 11G (or maybe 10g) panasonic models have similar blacks? What are the current samsung models' black levels?

Sorry for the questions, but I've been keeping up with this display for awhile now. THose numbers, however, don't seem to be remotely close to what the 8 or 9g kuros can put out.

Originally Posted by coltsfreak18

What plasma models would have black levels similar to that?

Didn't the 11G (or maybe 10g) panasonic models have similar blacks? What are the current samsung models' black levels?

Sorry for the questions, but I've been keeping up with this display for awhile now. THose numbers, however, don't seem to be remotely close to what the 8 or 9g kuros can put out.

Originally Posted by Dennis Dickerso

The current issue of Home Theater Magazine just tested the lastest Panasonic G10. They show the Full On/Full Off contrast ratio of the Panasonic to be 3,150 to 1. This is less than 1/2 of the 6644 to 1 that nicholc2 measured before calibration, but only 1/2 of that achieved after calibration. If truly comparable, the LaserVue appears to deliver 2x the contrast of the latest Panasonic plasma model in dynamic mode, but much less calibrated. The full numbers from Home Theater Magazine were 0.009 off and 28.35 on (not nearly as bright).

Originally Posted by nicholc2

Scientific lab testing, no. However, I recently calibrated a Laservue and here are the before/after results:

Before in dynamic mode:
0IRE - 0.012 ftL
100IRE - 77.846 ftL
Avg gamma - 1.34
Contrast 6644:1 (on/off, not ANSI)

After calibratrion in natural mode:
0IRE - 0.033 ftL
100IRE - 57.284 ftL
Avg gamma - 2.23
Contrast 1751:1 (on/off, not ANSI)

Blacks were very good before and after, but the real prize was how linear the gamma lined up and the grayscale was almost perfect across the board. The only shame was, as reported by reviewers and other calibrators, the primaries and secondaries could not be adjusted enough in the SM or UM to bring them to the HD spec. The largest offender was blue which was not adjustable at all with the current SM controls or UM controls. (Edit: Blue was adjustable, it just couldn't be adjusted in the correct direction. Any adjustment took it further out of spec.)

Here are the before/after for primaries/secondaries:
Color - x,y,Y
Red -.713, .286, 50.690
Green - .182, .784, 200.323
Blue - .163, .014, 7.325
Yellow - .445, .538, 253.683
Cyan - .169, .261, 207.778
Magenta - .331, .096, 74.609

And after:
Red - .642, .328, 45.038
Green - .289, .603, 121.680
Blue - .174, .062, 14.399
Yellow - .408, .509, 176.307
Cyan - .235, .331, 150.107
Magenta - .326, .149, 45.731

It's a shame blue couldn't be adjusted as that would have really helped. All of the others came fairly close.

Originally Posted by HDTVFanAtic

I do applaud you for having the guts to post numbers you had. However, in all due respect, the numbers you posted have a HIGH ERROR FACTOR.

As has been shown in the laserview threads, the i1 Pro is not close to accurate with a Laser or LED light source. The Laserview has been measured with high end units (Minolta CS2000, PR-670 and Progressive Labs Microtech) and unless the software has recently changed, the unit cannot be adjusted to get the green correct, not the blue. It does not surprise me that you show the blue as the issue, given the issues with the i1 Pro.

Furthermore, the Contrast Ratio number is meaningless as the i1 Pro is not accurate below 1.0 fL. If this wasn't enough, using an on/off method for testing is also meaningless when comparing different models as there is no standard for the size of the white box (the smaller the white box, the higher the fL and thus higher the Contrast Ratio). Its ridiculous to believe a number based on a fL of 0.12 fL when the i1 Pro is so INCREDIBLY inaccurate that that level of light.

So again, I applaud you for being public with the data you had available to you. However, with the i1 Pro and a Laser or LED light source, one has to be aware of the limits of the test equipment they are using. This is equivilant to measuring 0-60 MPH in a car with a device that only takes a measurement once every 5 seconds. Sure, you will get the few cars like a Porsche or a that can do 0-60MPH in 4 seconds measure out at the first reading of 5 seconds, then cars such as high end Mercedes that can do it in 6 seconds showing a measurement at 10 Seconds, while most of the cars on the road that take 11-14 Seconds would show 15 Seconds to reach 60 MPH with 5 second resolution. This will help put them into 3 different classes, but it does not come close to showing the entire story.

Bottom line - know the limitations of your the equipment used in your testing.

Originally Posted by nicholc2

Another thing that is of course possible is that the blue was indeed where I measured it. I have performed plenty of calibrations of other technologies to be able to tell whether color and grayscale are accurate. I also view the same demo material after each and every calibration as I am very familiar with how it should look.

Originally Posted by nicholc2

I appreciate your "candor", but you could be a little less inflamatory. Regardless of the "issues" some claim the i1 has with laser sources, I guarantee the pic was 110% better after I left.

Originally Posted by nicholc2

Plus all I was doing was trying to answer someone's question and post some data I gathered. I apologize if it wasn't good enough for you.

Originally Posted by nicholc2

BTW, I would like a link to the data you refer to in which "high end" testing equipment was used for a full calibration of a LaserVue television in which the calibrator was able to go into the service menu and do a complete calibration without Mitsubishi being there to interfere.

Originally Posted by HDTVFanAtic

As has been shown in the laserview threads, the i1 Pro is not close to accurate with a Laser or LED light source. The Laserview has been measured with high end units (Minolta CS2000, PR-670 and Progressive Labs Microtech) and unless the software has recently changed, the unit cannot be adjusted to get the green correct, not the blue. It does not surprise me that you show the blue as the issue, given the issues with the i1 Pro.

Originally Posted by nicholc2

I have been following both LaserVue threads since they were started very closely just in case I ever got the chance to get my hands on one. There are no instances where an after calibration report has been posted with actual coordinate values. I even asked umr to provide those numbers and he refused to do so. I am the first person to post what I came up with and I get slammed for it.

I in no way think that an i1Pro is anywhere close to as accurate as a 15k meter. I'm not that naive. I am a computer engineer with a mathematics background, so I have a very analytical mind. I want to see data, not graphs. Plus if you look, any actual data that is posted is "Pre-calibration" data, no post calibration data.

When I posted my results, it was just to provide some actual data that I gathered with my tool to answer someone's question. That's all. You were the one who chose to attack me, not the other way around.

Also, you should know that the LaserVue that I calibrated was one of the ones that came of the line "after" Mitsi fixed their manufacturing process. It could be that they changed something in the process that threw blue way off. Even if the I1 is up to 0.015 wrong in measuring a LaserVue, that still wouldn't account for the large error I measured.

Oh, and BTW, I also reviewed my first post with my results and I can't seem to find where I stated that my results were the defacto results for any calibrator or Laservue. I believe I stated this is what I came up with and that was that. I could have just been some end user using a spyder and wanted to give some feedback on what I measured. I guess I should have put a disclaimer at the end of my post so as to fend off any attacks. ;-)

Originally Posted by Dennis Dickerso

Well, I appreciate finally seeing some calibrated numbers, and thank you. Even the few reviews out there did not include measurements for contrast ratios. I am curious - I noted that when calibrated the 0 IRE increased and the 100 IRE decreased, which squeezed the contrast ratio from both ends - was this the result of the gamma being so far off ?

Originally Posted by lcaillo

I am curious where the data is from these measurements and where, specifically, the differences in measurement with the i1 and the other meters has been documented. Where are these measurements discussed and where are the spectral data to identify the limitations of the lower end meter?

Originally Posted by HDTVFanAtic

Try post #32 in this thread where umr gave specific info and told nicholc2 that the i1 Pro was not able to measure the laservue without a large error.

Search works wonders.....

Furthermore, the first 3 people allowed into Mitsubishi had full access of the SM with the CS2000 (all prior to 10/01/2008) - and once Green could not be moved far enough to correct the correct x,y position, only then was access to the SM denied for future people.

Finally, Gary Merson posted x,y positions in his article from early October of last year, so I am unsure why others claim "they" were the first to post x,y coordinates:

Brilliant Red x.7159 y.2833
DCI. Red x.680 y.320
Natural Red x.6790 y.3088
Rec. 709 Red x .640 y.330

Brilliant Green x.1725 y.7943
DCI Green x .265 y.690
Natural Green x.2920 y.6798
Rec. 709 Green x .300 y.600

Brilliant Blue x.1622 y.0129
DCI Blue x.150 y.0600
Natural Blue x.1628 y.0508
Rec. 709 Blue x.150 y.0600

http://hdguru.com/mitsubishi-laservu...exclusive/310/

Originally Posted by nicholc2

All umr did was post a blanket statement of the errors he said he discovered with the i1. He did not post any actual data to back this up. Again, I even asked him to do so and he would not. All I and lcaillo want to see is actual data. Neither of us are claiming umr is incorrect. We want to see the data to back up the claim....

Originally Posted by umr

Why bother? If you will not believe my statement why would my data be any more credible. These products are also going nowhere.

Originally Posted by umr

Why bother? If you will not believe my statement why would my data be any more credible. These products are also going nowhere.