or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official Sony KDL 32EX400 40EX400 46EX400 EX401
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Sony KDL 32EX400 40EX400 46EX400 EX401 - Page 22

post #631 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scatto View Post

Sony JPG-rendering code to a variety of factors that may cause owners to scratch their heads as to why things work for some files and not others.

'Tis a puzzlement... most often noted complaint is why some jpg's (all from the same or similar source) show up as a thumbnail while others just show a generic icon.
post #632 of 770
Wow - Scatto, you really dug into this! Cool. I was only mentioning it in passing for anyone interested. I'll try to answer what questions I can...

- do you mean that there was an overall, green tint / cast or do you mean that it appears that the white portions of the image were replaced with green while everything else appeared neutral?
A: White was replaced with an even shade of bright of green. Kind of like this guy: It was not just an "off white".

- how opaque or translucent was the green color?
A: Hmm - well it replaced pure white so, I'm not sure how to answer...

- did you test the same files on another TV (another of the same model, another of a different model by Sony, another of a model from a different manufacturer)?
A: Yes - I tested the exact same USB drive/files on an LG with jpeg viewing capability. It displayed the scans correctly - black and white.

Ignoring the possibility that the hue, color gain and color bias settings were all being skewed to green , an off-the-cuff guess may be a sensitivity to the way the files were saved:

- what application did you use to save the files?
A: They were downloaded from an on-line server in a .zip file and extracted to a folder using Windows XP. I did not take the pictures or create the files.
- did you save the files as JPGs via conversion from a different format (TIFF, mult-page TIFF, PSD, etc.)?
A: See above.

- did you save the files with a color management profile embedded?
A: No. See above.

- did you save the files with any other data embedded (thumbnail, EXIF, etc.)?
A: No. See above.

In my own experience, some of the photographic images I have created and viewed (both B&W and color) were scanned with a Canonscan 9000F in TIFF format, color corrected in Photoshop and saved as TIFF (including the layers), then saved as JPGs AFTER flattening the image. Everything using this work-flow has produced images that display very nicely on my EX400.

I will note, however, that on a couple of occasions when I immediately saved PSD files as JPGs without first flattening the images, the EX400 displayed multiple horizontal red lines evenly spaced from top to bottom of the images (approx. 3'' apart ... I didn't measure but I think that is about correct). Re-saving the files AFTER flattening allowed the TV to display the images correctly. This was repeatable (the incidents occurred on either my first or second EX400; I have not tested this on my current one yet.)

The horizontal red lines mentioned above did not appear when the files were viewed in ANY PC application that I use (on Linux or Windows) regardless of whether the images were flattened first or not. This is why my post leans toward the possibility that the Sony image handling engine is extremely fragile / unsophisticated and does not always handle JPG images the way most other applications do.

By the way, I apologize in advance for violating Occam's razor here.

Hey - I think it's cool that you tried to figure it out! (For everyone else reading - I did not apply quotes to this, most of this is from Scatto's post.
post #633 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobLee View Post

'Tis a puzzlement... most often noted complaint is why some jpg's (all from the same or similar source) show up as a thumbnail while others just show a generic icon.

It does not appear that the Sony devices are generating thumbnails on-the-fly (perhaps that is what some are expecting to happen?).

Instead, the device is extracting an embedded thumbnail. ** If the file has no embedded thumbnail, or a thumbnail is embedded in a manner that is not compatible with the devices requirements, no thumbnail will be displayed.

Regarding the aforementioned requirements: some applications store proprietary EXIF format thumbnails (not specifically part of the JPG spec), and though an examination of the file's EXIF data shows a binary thumbnail embedded, the Sony device cannot read / extract the thumbnail. Binary data tagged as 'Photoshop Thumbnails' is an example.

Here is what you should see in the EXIF data of files that display thumbnails (may be presented slightly differently depending on the tool used to view the data):
Code:
Thumbnail Offset                : 202
Thumbnail Length                : 3078
Thumbnail Image                 : (Binary data 3078 bytes, use -b option to extract)
Why do some files from the same or similar source not show up:

- Most cameras are capable of saving properly-generated-thumbnail EXIF data that the Sony device can extract and display. However, that feature may get turned off;

- Probably more likely is that some applications may strip or modify EXIF data during manipulation or saving, so even if the original image came from the camera with an embedded thumbnail, processing the file post-camera may lose the data, and no thumbnail will be available to the Sony device for display;

- Files that originate from sources that have no capability of embedding thumbnails will, of course, always have the generic thumbnail icon displayed by the Sony device unless you take some additional action to embed a thumbnail.

This is my story, and I'm sticking with it.

----
** To test whether the thumbnail is generated or extracted, you can embed a thumbnail created from Image A (your dog) into Image B (your cat), then view Image B on your Sony device. The thumbnail will be of your dog, but clicking on the thumbnail will display the full-size image of your cat. If the thumbnail were being generated on-the-fly, the thumbnail displayed would match the full-size image (i.e., it would be of your cat).
post #634 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scatto View Post

It does not appear that the Sony devices are generating thumbnails on-the-fly (perhaps that is what some are expecting to happen?).

Wow! Very informative! Yes, I pretty much assumed that thumbs were generated on the fly, and did not even know there were embedded thumbs... or, as you said, part of the spec (afaik).

Quote:


Here is what you should see in the EXIF data of files that display thumbnails (may be presented slightly differently depending on the tool used to view the data):
Code:
Thumbnail Offset                : 202
Thumbnail Length                : 3078
Thumbnail Image                 : (Binary data 3078 bytes, use -b option to extract)

Guess I'll have to look for that!

Quote:


Why do some files from the same or similar source not show up:
...
- Probably more likely is that some applications may strip or modify EXIF data during manipulation or saving, so even if the original image came from the camera with an embedded thumbnail, processing the file post-camera may lose the data, and no thumbnail will be available to the Sony device for display;

Yes, that's probably exactly what happened/happens in my case.

Quote:


** To test whether the thumbnail is generated or extracted, you can embed a thumbnail created from Image A (your dog) into Image B (your cat), then view Image B on your Sony device. The thumbnail will be of your dog, but clicking on the thumbnail will display the full-size image of your cat. If the thumbnail were being generated on-the-fly, the thumbnail displayed would match the full-size image (i.e., it would be of your cat).

... not sure I have the ability to do that, but will keep it in mind. Thanks!
post #635 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobLee View Post
... not sure I have the ability to do that, but will keep it in mind. Thanks!
What? No cat? No dog? Okay. So I'll provide the images.

Attached you will find two ~1920x1080 JPG files* ... 'cat.jpg' and 'dog.jpg'. A thumbnail of dog.jpg was created and embedded in cat.jpg, and vice versa.
If you are curious, just save the files to your flash drive and view them with your Sony TV.

If you're really curious, I used ExifTool (the command line version in both Windows and Linux) to embed the thumbs, and there seems to be a variety of GUI front-ends available. I've used ExifTool quite a bit over the years, but I don't recall having tried any of the GUIs that have been created for it, so I can't comment.

http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/

-------
* The files are zipped to protect them from the forum's image tools (they strip the EXIF data which is normally a good thing because it can prevent inadvertant privacy issues).

 

test_images.zip 58.583984375k . file
post #636 of 770
My digital cable through comcast with component inputs looks pixelated as...a pixelated image. It's pretty terrible...i thought it was the TV just not handling motion well, and it still may be a problem that other tvs handle better, but i put in The Dark Knight blu ray and it looks a lot better.

Still don't like the back light uniformity though, the samsung panel was a lot better
post #637 of 770
Whoever said gaming mode is not recommended is right! I downloaded the ME2 demo today for PS3 and MAN I saw more V-sync issues when using Custom with fairchild's settings. An old man's upper cranium kept shifting. I never noticed it in other games but it was bothersome. Overall throughout the whole demo(I played it twice, trying each setting in entirety), Custom was better than Gaming. Bit disappointing but I preferred Custom anyway; I don't have a sound system yet and the EQ can't be toyed with in Game mode.
post #638 of 770
I've had this TV for about 6 months, figured I'd post my settings for the hell of it. These settings are used for Dish Network HD & SD only. I tried a calibration disc before, but found it to be useless. I'm not a pro, but this is what looks good to my eyes, after tweaking many times. When I first got this TV I had all of the settings jacked up super bright, but over time, I've found these settings to be most natural while offering good blacks.

Scene Mode -- CINEMA
Wide Mode -- Full / Full Pixel

Picture Mode -- CINEMA
Backlight -- 5
Picture -- 89
Brightness -- 50
Color -- 50
Hue -- 0
Color Temp -- Warm 2
Sharpness -- 0
Noise Reduction -- OFF
MPEG Noise Reduction -- OFF
Cinemotion -- AUTO

Advanced Settings -- ALL OFF, white balances at DEFAULT
Ambient Sensor -- ON


Sound Mode -- Dynamic
Surround -- ON



I'm one of the few fans of the Ambient Sensor. I find it to be very convenient for day/night viewing, giving optimal brightness. I don't really see any drawbacks.

One thing I've noticed on this TV, which occurs with Ambient Sensor both OFF and ON, is that when the scene changes from very light to very dark, or vice versa, the the picture settings (brightness/sharpness) will automatically change after 1 or 2 seconds. I have the Auto Constrast Enhancer turned off. I've been wondering for awhile what is causing this. Also, this occurs for all Scene Modes.
post #639 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepperr View Post

Whoever said gaming mode is not recommended is right! I downloaded the ME2 demo today for PS3 and MAN I saw more V-sync issues when using Custom with fairchild's settings. An old man's upper cranium kept shifting. I never noticed it in other games but it was bothersome. Overall throughout the whole demo(I played it twice, trying each setting in entirety), Custom was better than Gaming. Bit disappointing but I preferred Custom anyway; I don't have a sound system yet and the EQ can't be toyed with in Game mode.


Did you have Wide Mode set to Full?

I use Game - Original, as others have mentioned having the least frame delay. Originally, I thought it was distorting things, then I realized it was set to Wide Zoom instead of Full. Now everything looks great.
post #640 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepperr View Post

Whoever said gaming mode is not recommended is right!



Well, I now don't think so about the game mode.

I found all the modes are just preset settings on Video and Sound option screens.
You easily can make Game mode from Cinema mode and vice versa by adjusting a few sliders appropriately.
Someone wrote the sound was different in gaming mode. That's right, it's because in gaming mode treble and bass sliders in Sound options are both set to +4 (you can ajust them the same in any other mode).

So now I play in game mode with its default settings, except I lowered backlight to 3 from 5.
Other differences from Cinema mode is that Game mode gamma is set to neutral by default instead of warm in Cinema mode (and I think it's better for games and graphics), contrast is set to 100% (instead of 85%), sharpness is set to 50% (instead of 20%), and noice reduction is off completely (instead of set to low) which is appropriate for consoles/computers.
post #641 of 770
The problem with game mode is that the EQ is grayed out (which means you can't change it). This might not be a problem for people that use external speakers or don't care about changing the EQ.

Same thing with Cinema, the EQ is grayed out. The only mode where you can change the EQ is in custom mode.
post #642 of 770
I had Wide to "Full". As fairchild said, EQ is greyed out and the Sound is horrible without it if you use the TV's speakers.
post #643 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepperr View Post

... the Sound is horrible without it if you use the TV's speakers.

The sound is horrible if you use the speakers, period.
post #644 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobLee View Post

The sound is horrible if you use the speakers, period.

It doesn't sound horrible. It's just weak when compared to actual speakers and/or a receiver system.

Most people know this though. When you are using it in a bedroom, often you don't have a choice nor need for a super powerful sound system.
post #645 of 770
Can anyone please shed some light on why there are several nearly identical settings for screen size?

Last night we were watching a subtitled movie and the bottom half of the subtitles were cut off. I eventually found the screen size settings in the menu and changed it from "Normal" to Full Pixel, which made the screen slightly smaller, but otherwise unchanged from what I would consider normal (no borders around the image or anything like that). It appears that under the default setting of "Normal" the outer edges of the image are off screen.

The manual states:
Full Pixel setting shows the image in its "original" size
Normal shows it at its "recommended" size.

So far I don't see any change on the "-1" setting. My guess is these adjustments may be needed for games or PC usage, but I don't understand why "Normal" would be the default setting for TV's and movies rather than Full Pixel. And why would the "original" size not be the "recommended" size? Anyone got a clue?
post #646 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobLee View Post

Can anyone please shed some light on why there are several nearly identical settings for screen size?

Last night we were watching a subtitled movie and the bottom half of the subtitles were cut off. I eventually found the screen size settings in the menu and changed it from "Normal" to Full Pixel, which made the screen slightly smaller, but otherwise unchanged from what I would consider normal (no borders around the image or anything like that). It appears that under the default setting of "Normal" the outer edges of the image are off screen.

The manual states:
Full Pixel setting shows the image in its "original" size
Normal shows it at its "recommended" size.

So far I don't see any change on the "-1" setting. My guess is these adjustments may be needed for games or PC usage, but I don't understand why "Normal" would be the default setting for TV's and movies rather than Full Pixel. And why would the "original" size not be the "recommended" size? Anyone got a clue?


Hi, I can shed some light on this situation:

Out of the box, the TV is set to overscan for people who don't like black bars, or for cable providers, who might have garbage on the very edge of their content to cut it off the screen.

Setting the TV to fullpixel (the correct setting) turns off overscan so the content is displayed correctly without running of the screen. If you're using a blu-ray player, let the player deal with 4:3 content. To correctly display 4:3 content it should be pillarboxed. This puts black bars on the sides, and the video should be a square, compared to a 16:9 rectangle. (that's over HDMI).

If you're using an SD content connection composite/component go into the settings for that connection, and set auto wide on. For 4:3 Default set it to normal. For wide mode set it to full. Depending on the player, or other device, the TV will adjust for the aspect ratio automatically between those two settings.

Hope this helps!
post #647 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacinMan View Post

Out of the box, the TV is set to overscan for people who don't like black bars, or for cable providers, who might have garbage on the very edge of their content to cut it off the screen... Setting the TV to fullpixel (the correct setting) turns off overscan so the content is displayed correctly without running of the screen.

Thanks for the tutorial!
I have observed junk at the top or bottom on rare occasion; now I know what to do when that happens.
Otherwise I will try to keep it set to full pixel.

Quote:


To correctly display 4:3 content it should be pillarboxed. This puts black bars on the sides, and the video should be a square, compared to a 16:9 rectangle.

I think we've previously discussed that this set does not have the capability to "unstretch" 4x3 content that some stations stretch to 16x9. We also have a Toshiba LCD in the bedroom with six screen modes, including one that can pillarbox such stretched broadcast... wish they all could do that.
post #648 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobLee View Post

Thanks for the tutorial!
I have observed junk at the top or bottom on rare occasion; now I know what to do when that happens.
Otherwise I will try to keep it set to full pixel.



I think we've previously discussed that this set does not have the capability to "unstretch" 4x3 content that some stations stretch to 16x9. We also have a Toshiba LCD in the bedroom with six screen modes, including one that can pillarbox such stretched broadcast... wish they all could do that.

I've had no issues with 4:3 content on my sony model EX32400. In fact, I have gone to an old reliable toshiba DVD player i gave my mom back in 2002 or a bit before, and while it doesn't display content correctly by itself, the TV can detect content coming in and If you set your settings accordingly to my instructions above, for (non HDMI) connections you'll be fine. Whatever issues you're having with cable is most likely on their end not yours, and the sony can't deal with it. In the case of Devices that connect via HDMI such as a blu-ray player, upscaling DVD player, etc they usually contain built in detection/options for viewing content at the correct aspect ratio.
post #649 of 770
Yeah, I have no issues at all with locally connected devices. You had mentioned pillarbox, which is why I stated that the Toshoba "can pillarbox such stretched broadcast", which I've seen referred to elsewhere here on AVS as "stretch-o-vision". You're right... it's on their end, but it's nice when a manufacturer includes the capability to correct it.
post #650 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobLee View Post

Yeah, I have no issues at all with locally connected devices. You had mentioned pillarbox, which is why I stated that the Toshoba "can pillarbox such stretched broadcast", which I've seen referred to elsewhere here on AVS as "stretch-o-vision". You're right... it's on their end, but it's nice when a manufacturer includes the capability to correct it.

I guess it depends on what kind of broadcast too. For example:

Over the air, the TV can deal with, and since HD is free now OTA i don't use cable, or satellite TV. I don't watch much live TV, but what I do watch from time to time is free. Cable especially screws with video content, and as a video professional irritates me, because they screw with aspect ratio so people don't whine about black bars, etc. I'd rather have the bars and see the content as the director/producer intended.
post #651 of 770
Yup! +1
post #652 of 770
I need some assistance, y'all, if you wouldn't mind helping me.
I'm planning on purchasing these computer speakers:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16836150086

off of Amazon(no tax). I'm not familiar with TV's and only above-average-familiar with computers(have built a few) and would like to know how I can connect the system to my TV. It doesn't have an optical input unfortunately, so I can't utilize the TV's OUT. Many thanks in advance.

BTW, I've been testing between "Game-STD" mode and "General" with custom settings, I feel there is no/negligible difference between the two.
In Heavy Rain, the game seems to be a bit laggy depending on the environment(it doesn't seem to be dependent on the # of objects in the surroundings, which surprises me). In NHL, BC2, and RDR there is no difference between both modes. The only noticeable difference occurred when playing Ultimate Alliance(my only 1080p game).

The game runs terribly and is always laggy. I feel like it constantly runs at 20fps when you are not fighting enemies or even in a small room. The "Game" setting seemed to alleviate the perceived frame rate issues a bit, but not enough to sacrifice my sound.

Since this system doesn't have an EQ, I will keep playing on Custom.

On another note, the screen tearing I was referring to is a software fault in ME2's demo. I read a eurogamer article recently that stated that the Dev's removed V-sync + an FPS-cap from the Demo, which resulted in the screen tearing.

Here is link to Ex400's details in case you don't have the manual in front of you:

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...specifications
post #653 of 770
RobLess is talking about the ability of the TV to unstretch 4:3 material that a disc player sends to the set. I don't think any TV can properly handle this; at least, none of the few I've tried do. However, it's really a problem in the player, not the TV. Some players, like both of my dual players, output (via HDMI) 4:3 SD material stretched, because the default output resolution is 1080p. Some players do have the ability to retain the 4:3 ratio, but mine do not. When the TV receives a 1080p signal, it can't automatically decide that it's intended to be 4:3 (how could it?) and unstretch it.

Doug
post #654 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougotte View Post

RobLess is talking about the ability of the TV to unstretch 4:3 material that a disc player sends to the set. I don't think any TV can properly handle this; at least, none of the few I've tried do. However, it's really a problem in the player, not the TV.... When the TV receives a 1080p signal, it can't automatically decide that it's intended to be 4:3 (how could it?) and unstretch it.

If "Robless" is me, then I wasn't actually speaking of stretched signal from "devices", epecially not a disc player, unless the "device" you're speaking of is a cable box. The issue I have is HD broadcasts from TBS-HD and such which broadcast 4x3 material stretched to 16x9 rather than pillarboxed (as TCM always does properly).

Surprisingly, the new Toshiba 32E200 I bought for the bedroom DOES have the capability to pillarbox stretched broadcasts. They call it "4x3HD" and is one of six different aspect ratios that set offers. Most sets I've seen only offer several "zoom" modes, the most USELESS of all being "wide zoom" on the Sony.
post #655 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobLee View Post

If "Robless" is me, then I wasn't actually speaking of stretched signal from "devices", epecially not a disc player, unless the "device" you're speaking of is a cable box. The issue I have is HD broadcasts from TBS-HD and such which broadcast 4x3 material stretched to 16x9 rather than pillarboxed (as TCM always does properly).

Surprisingly, the new Toshiba 32E200 I bought for the bedroom DOES have the capability to pillarbox stretched broadcasts. They call it "4x3HD" and is one of six different aspect ratios that set offers. Most sets I've seen only offer several "zoom" modes, the most USELESS of all being "wide zoom" on the Sony.

Oops. Thanks for clarifying, and I'm mortified that I messed up your name. On some forum, somebody kept referring to me as "dougette" for a while.

Doug
post #656 of 770
Hey, it happens... don't worry about it. There are quite a few "Rob-somethings" on AVS and just wanted to make sure that it was actually my post you were referring to.

As for the TV's ability to correct stretched broadcasts, I was surprised to discover that it could do that... even more surprised that there aren't more sets that can do so. I've seen such stretched programming is referred to as "stretch-o-vision" in other forums here on AVS so I know it is a common problem.
post #657 of 770
I am thinking about buying this TV and plan on using it for gaming and movie watching. I play shooter games and its going in my bedroom which has me about 5 feet away. Will this TV be good for fast paced shooting games or will it mess up? I would also like to know what this Tv's response time is as i can't find it anywhere. Thanks
post #658 of 770
Quote:


Will this TV be good for fast paced shooting games or will it mess up? I would also like to know what this Tv's response time is as i can't find it anywhere. Thanks

Not a gamer, but I have read quite a bit around here. The EX 400(EX 500 also) series is one of the faster response(least input lag) sets for gaming, scoring right up there with LG 450 series. From what I understand not many other 2010 LCD models come close to those two. If you only care about gaming and not using it for movies etc, there may be faster options, I don't know.

There is a giant discussion around here about input lag(Search 'input lag wars' I think) and measuring it(A completely different thing from the panel response time.).
post #659 of 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyershockey77 View Post

I am thinking about buying this TV and plan on using it for gaming and movie watching. I play shooter games and its going in my bedroom which has me about 5 feet away. Will this TV be good for fast paced shooting games or will it mess up? I would also like to know what this Tv's response time is as i can't find it anywhere. Thanks

I bought 32ex402 about a month ago mainly for gaming (PS3) and sometimes analog TV, and although I had my doubts before purchasing (had high-quality CRT monitors before) I'm happy with it. About the same distance here too (5 feet), maybe even closer. It also has surprisingly good sound and in some games there is even surround effect when you can tell that sound comes kinda from behind when its source is behind you (killzone 2 f.e.)
post #660 of 770
I cant tell if my brother has a AuO panel or a Samsung/Sony panel.

The ones at the store under a loop have the chevron like pattern, but more acute angles.

My brother's has vertical bars in sections.

Old AuO & Samsung panels have the trianglur shaped pattern, and both of their newer panels have the vertical bars with blocks configuration.

Can anyone help untangle my confusion?

Here is what the one looks like at Walmart, probably been on the shelf since they came out and thus more likely (in my mind) to be S-PVA panelled.

Samsung S-PVA 2009



but it also looks like this...

AuO MVA old type




The one my brother has looks like this...

AuO MVA-3



But could be this...

Samsung S-PVA

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official Sony KDL 32EX400 40EX400 46EX400 EX401