AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › JVC 2011 models & MSRP: RS40 50 60 & HD250.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JVC 2011 models & MSRP: RS40 50 60 & HD250. - Page 197  

post #5881 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

...My hope is that forum members do 3D right so we don't get tons of complaints from JVC and Sony owners about the image being to dim and on and on. This just feeds into the anti-3D crowd and their negativity. So please, if you have to buy something like the HP screen, even if you use it only for 3D, then just do it!...

HP screen would be nice, but some of us cannot accommodate one in the way it needs to be used to get the gain advantages it offers (ceiling mount does not, and that's my only option). If indeed we are looking at 3-5ftL for 3D for those with a ceiling mount using common screens like StudioTek or Firehawk it seems complaints will be inevitable.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #5882 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by krichter1 View Post

Thanks for all your hard work Ron; great job!

Please refresh my memory though; did we already confirm a difference in polarization orientation between the X103's and JVC glasses or may they be identical (so to speak)?

Kevin


.

Xpand confirmed the X103s are vertically polarized and the OEM version they are supplying to JVC is horizontal polarized (as is a OEM version that are supplying to HP for use with their new 3D laptop PC).
post #5883 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

That pretty much mirrors my experience. I was seriously contemplating either the Samsung or Panasonic 3D plasma and also purchasing the RS40. For some reason I bought the Acer and on my 120" HP the image has floored me. To be honest I'm no longer interested in the other 3D options. I'm an equipment junkie so at some point I'll buy a 1080p 3D projector, but for right now I'm flabbergasted by what a cheap 720p 3D projector can do!

My hope is that forum members do 3D right so we don't get tons of complaints from JVC and Sony owners about the image being to dim and on and on. This just feeds into the anti-3D crowd and their negativity. So please, if you have to buy something like the HP screen, even if you use it only for 3D, then just do it!

Here's a little rant from Grant. If you don't like 3D then fine. No one is going to force you to watch it, so don't, but please keep your negativity to yourself. Some people just can't handle change. I'm fine with that, but I'm not fine with all the vociferous bitching so let the rest of us enjoy what we enjoy. Listen to yourselves complaining, and I'll bet you'll be surprised at how awful it is. If you have a spouse who is still with you then give her a kiss and some flowers because she certainly deserves something positive for putting up with the likes of you! End of rant.

Pretty good rant, Grant. Mind if I pile on?

RANT ON

I agree with you. Of course, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but some people seem to have made it a mission to convince others that 3D is a gimmick and worthless, and that it will fail. Worse, they throw out comments like, "No one wants 3D," or "NO ONE WANTS TO WEAR THOSE FUNKY GLASSES," or other such nonsense. IMO, even a film critic like Roger Ebert (whose opinion is his business) goes too far when he says that 3D adds nothing to the filmmaking experience. Obviously, there are millions who are at odds with that opinion, and I think he comes off looking seriously disconnected from mainstream sentiment. It's one thing to condemn a single film, but to condemn all of 3D is like condemning the use of wide angle lenses, or certain types of film stock, or the Steadicam, or color. In my mind, someone who does that dramatically lowers their credibility.

Another serious offender is Phil Swan of TVPredictions, who is on record as predicting that 3D will fail. He takes jabs at the technology at every opportunity. I'm sure he's poised to claim he was right when he predicted that 3D would fail in 2010, even though the real reason for slow 3D sales, IMO, has more to do with the fact that there were virtually no 3D titles available in 2010 until November. But that won't stop him from adding the failure of 3D to his list of "correct" predictions.

Anyway, it's pointless to argue whether 3D will fail or succeed. We'll know for sure in a couple of years. As someone who desperately wants 3D to succeed, I choose to remain very optimistic about the prospects. Actually, I see little reason for 3D NOT to succeed this time around. Technologically, there's no reason for it not to, and the theatrical success of 3D says to me that people will want it in increasing numbers in their homes, too. Of course, there's always the difference in screen size, but that doesn't seem to have stopped the popularity of "Home Theater," even though it most often means screens that are far smaller than commercial theaters.

RANT OFF
post #5884 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Its all about gain in 3D. The HP does not maintain polarization but if set up right, the HP does have a lot of gain with not a lot of adverse effects. A less of gain screen that maintains a high degree of polarization, the end result may be less gain than the HP.

Correct. But you could potentially use a screen with a gain in the 1.3 to 1.5 range that does keep a lot of the polarization and end up with a similar on-axis level for 3D viewing as with the HP and better off-axis performance (or as an alternative for situations where you cannot mount the projector near eye-level and as a result the HP performance would be sub-optimum).
post #5885 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:08pm
Hey guys, this is not a political campaign, to vote 3d in or out. I personally could care less about it, but I'm not trying to convince any of you that are turned on about it to change your mind. If you like it, fine; if not, also fine. Whether it stays around will simply depend on how many people want it, and they will have to decide that individually. Clearly the industry is trying to convince people that they want it, but I think people will decide on their own.
post #5886 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:11pm
FP CRT kept many of us happy lumens wise for many years. 3D Digital FP should be no worse than FP CRT. I agree that more 3D FP digital light will be required.
post #5887 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

Correct. But you could potentially use a screen with a gain in the 1.3 to 1.5 range that does keep a lot of the polarization and end up with a similar on-axis level for 3D viewing as with the HP and better off-axis performance (or as an alternative for situations where you cannot mount the projector near eye-level where the HP performance is sub-optimum).


This is exactly why I am curious about the ST130.
post #5888 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post

HP screen would be nice, but some of us cannot accommodate one in the way it needs to be used to get the gain advantages it offers (ceiling mount does not, and that's my only option). If indeed we are looking at 3-5ftL for 3D for those with a ceiling mount using common screens like StudioTek or Firehawk it seems complaints will be inevitable.

Can anyone comment on the degree to which the Stewart Firehawk maintains polarization?
post #5889 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post

Xpand confirmed the X103s are vertically polarized and the OEM version they are supplying to JVC is horizontal polarized (as is a OEM version that are supplying to HP for use with their new 3D laptop PC).

Thanks Ron; I thought I remembered you saying this a while back.


MARK H. - For those of us with ~0% PR screens and who also ordered JVC glasses with our PJ's can we return the glasses if we find the X103's are better with our current screens?

Thanks!


-
post #5890 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

Hey guys, this is not a political campaign, to vote 3d in or out. I personally could care less about it, but I'm not trying to convince any of you that are turned on about it to change your mind. If you like it, fine; if not, also fine. Whether it stays around will simply depend on how many people want it, and they will have to decide that individually. Clearly the industry is trying to convince people that they want it, but I think people will decide on their own.

+1
You couldn't have said it better.
post #5891 of 8828
11/26/10 at 5:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

Hey guys, this is not a political campaign, to vote 3d in or out. I personally could care less about it, but I'm not trying to convince any of you that are turned on about it to change your mind. If you like it, fine; if not, also fine. Whether it stays around will simply depend on how many people want it, and they will have to decide that individually. Clearly the industry is trying to convince people that they want it, but I think people will decide on their own.

Agreed. People will decide whether they want 3D or not. However...

More 3D RANTING ahead. Fair warning. Skip this if you're sick of all the 3D talk:

The idea that the industry is trying to convince people that they want 3D addresses only one side of that coin, don't you think? While I agree, you could just as easily (and accurately) argue that the industry is responding to the public's obvious interest in 3D at theaters by bringing it into the home. You can choose to look at it as their attempts to force 3D on people, or you can choose to praise them for delivering to market a technology that many people want.

I've always been impatient for mainstream 3D, but I recognized that there were technological obstacles to 3D's more widespread adoption. Those obstacles have evaporated. Displays and computer technology are fully capable of 3D now, and the content is starting to become available in larger quantities. I've heard people rant vehemently that 3D is just a ploy by the studios and CE manufacturers to grab more money from the unsuspecting consumer. The implication in such criticism is that there is little or nothing of intrinsic value in 3D, and that we are all being duped out of our money by the greedy. I would argue just the opposite. I'm impatient not only for 3D now, but for rapid advancements in the technology. The advances that make 3D possible tend to make 2D better, also. Why wouldn't every videophile be for that? If someone doesn't want 3D, they can still benefit from what it brings to all displays.

You see, I keep thinking back to Petri's comment that, when he was watching that certain movie, he just wished we could be there to share it with him. Out of all the posts, that one sticks out in my mind. It really gave me hope that these new JVC projectors may fulfill my desire for a TRUE 3D home theater experience - one that not only matches the theatrical experience, but, hopefully, exceeds it. And at a reasonable price! Frankly, I wouldn't even be here right now if JVC were more like Sony or Sharp or others, who have priced their first gen 3D projectors well out of my comfort zone, and well above what their true 3D R&D costs probably are.
post #5892 of 8828
11/26/10 at 6:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post
Agreed. People will decide whether they want 3D or not. However...

More 3D RANTING ahead. Fair warning. Skip this if you're sick of all the 3D talk:

The idea that the industry is trying to convince people that they want 3D addresses only one side of that coin, don't you think? While I agree, you could just as easily (and accurately) argue that the industry is responding to the public's obvious interest in 3D at theaters by bringing it into the home. You can choose to look at it as their attempts to force 3D on people, or you can choose to praise them for delivering to market a technology that many people want.

I've always been impatient for mainstream 3D, but I recognized that there were technological obstacles to 3D's more widespread adoption. Those obstacles have evaporated. Displays and computer technology are fully capable of 3D now, and the content is starting to become available in larger quantities. I've heard people rant vehemently that 3D is just a ploy by the studios and CE manufacturers to grab more money from the unsuspecting consumer. The implication in such criticism is that there is little or nothing of intrinsic value in 3D, and that we are all being duped out of our money by the greedy. I would argue just the opposite. I'm impatient not only for 3D now, but for rapid advancements in the technology. The advances that make 3D possible tend to make 2D better, also. Why wouldn't every videophile be for that? If someone doesn't want 3D, they can still benefit from what it brings to all displays.

You see, I keep thinking back to Petri's comment that, when he was watching that certain movie, he just wished we could be there to share it with him. Out of all the posts, that one sticks out in my mind. It really gave me hope that these new JVC projectors may fulfill my desire for a TRUE 3D home theater experience - one that not only matches the theatrical experience, but, hopefully, exceeds it. And at a reasonable price! Frankly, I wouldn't even be here right now if JVC were more like Sony or Sharp or others, who have priced their first gen 3D projectors well out of my comfort zone, and well above what their true 3D R&D costs probably are.
+1...Heck, I'm impatient as to what lies ahead in my after life...but I'm stuck here having to wait in this dimension...If I do have to stay around here for a while...well, damn it! I want the best technology has to offer... 3D movies!....
post #5893 of 8828
11/26/10 at 6:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Clark View Post
... The advances that make 3D possible tend to make 2D better, also. Why wouldn't every videophile be for that? If someone doesn't want 3D, they can still benefit from what it brings to all displays. ...
Feel free to RANT; it's good for the soul. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/images/icons/icon7.gif

And I'm hoping that you are in fact right in the above statement, i.e., that the RS50, for example, will be a significant enough improvement over my RS20 to make me happy. If I conclude that I don't see much difference, I'll be disappointed, though won't blame it on 3d!

PS Clearly I don't know how to add the appropriate smiley faces.
post #5894 of 8828
11/26/10 at 7:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post
...........that the RS50, for example, will be a significant enough improvement over my RS20 to make me happy. If I conclude that I don't see much difference, I'll be disappointed, though won't blame it on 3d!
I'm looking forward to reading about your observations....when are you expecting delivery of the RS50?
post #5895 of 8828
11/26/10 at 7:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post
Feel free to RANT; it's good for the soul. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/images/icons/icon7.gif

And I'm hoping that you are in fact right in the above statement, i.e., that the RS50, for example, will be a significant enough improvement over my RS20 to make me happy. If I conclude that I don't see much difference, I'll be disappointed, though won't blame it on 3d!

PS Clearly I don't know how to add the appropriate smiley faces.
Use the "POST REPLY" tab on the lower left of the last post instead of the "quick reply"...then it allows you to merely click on a smiley face of your choosing...
post #5896 of 8828
11/26/10 at 8:19pm
Is anybody planning to use an RS40 with a 100" Diagonal 16:9 Carada Precision screen? Is the Brilliant white 1.4 gain screen material a good option or is the 1.0 Classis Cinema White a better choice? Not looking at the Criterion screen because I'd lose another 2.5" in height and require a custom screen size. Room will be mostly darkened. Total light control, in fact, the screen will block out the window during use. Throw distance approximately 12.5 feet.
post #5897 of 8828
11/26/10 at 8:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post
I'm looking forward to reading about your observations....when are you expecting delivery of the RS50?
I'm on an order list but not convinced that I want to bite early. Might like to wait and see some authoritative reviews, e.g., from Ekkehart (cine4home), and esp from Greg Rodgers.
post #5898 of 8828
11/26/10 at 9:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post
I'm on an order list but not convinced that I want to bite early. Might like to wait and see some authoritative reviews, e.g., from Ekkehart (cine4home), and esp from Greg Rodgers.
Good move........I've got a HD750/RS20 as well and am going the 2 screen rout to get CIH/CIA and need Lens memory....but may keep the HD750 for the smaller screen and get an X7/X9 for the larger....if it's head and shoulders above.....but not if the difference is marginal.

Good luck!
post #5899 of 8828
11/26/10 at 10:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post
Xpand confirmed the X103s are vertically polarized and the OEM version they are supplying to JVC is horizontal polarized (as is a OEM version that are supplying to HP for use with their new 3D laptop PC).
Thanks. What implication does this have for using the Xpand 103 with the JVCs (along with a Firehawk screen, if that matters)? Does this mean the Xpand glasses will be darker than the JVC ones?
post #5900 of 8828
11/26/10 at 10:35pm
I think it's fair to assume that many dealers and some very lucky buyers will have their hands on one of the 3 new JVCs in thenext 7-10 days And hopeuflly AVS will finally get their review/demo unit in soon. I think I sort of ruined my 3D surprise ith the new 55" LED Sony but i am still quite anxious to see it n the big screen. Sounds like i made the right choice with the Xpand x103 glasses, will just have to wait and see once i get my RS40.
post #5901 of 8828
11/26/10 at 11:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
Thanks. What implication does this have for using the Xpand 103 with the JVCs (along with a Firehawk screen, if that matters)? Does this mean the Xpand glasses will be darker than the JVC ones?
Only if the firehawk maintains polarization to some degree which I dont think we know yet..........hoping we can find out about the Stewart screens and polarization here pretty quick since there is a $50 price dif between what my dealer is charging for the JVC glasses and the AVS price on the Xpand103. If we dont find out something pretty soon, I am just going to get 1 of each pair and sell off the pair that looses.

Hey Mark, what is the AVS return policy on the Xpand glasses?
post #5902 of 8828
11/26/10 at 11:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by damnsam77 View Post
I think it's fair to assume that many dealers and some very lucky buyers will have their hands on one of the 3 new JVCs in thenext 7-10 days And hopeuflly AVS will finally get their review/demo unit in soon. I think I sort of ruined my 3D surprise ith the new 55" LED Sony but i am still quite anxious to see it n the big screen. Sounds like i made the right choice with the Xpand x103 glasses, will just have to wait and see once i get my RS40.
There has been talk of a slight release delay over in the UK thread.......start reading from post #545 and on......

http://www.avforums.com/forums/proje...2010-a-19.html

Dont know how accurate that is, but if true we could be getting a slight delay as well.
post #5903 of 8828
11/26/10 at 11:32pm
I will inquire with Stwart on Monday re if and to what extent their various screen materials maintain polarization. Please refrain from flooding them with calls. I will do it early Monday AM and post. They might not post and then I will have to contact one of their engineers and get him to dig up a lcd projector and a polarizer and run tests on thier various fabrics. this might take a while but I will post updates when I know anything such as that they are running tests. I doubt the Stewart sales guys will have the info.

Re return policy on glasses I don`t know. That will await our Monday afternoon conference sales call. I suspect that once a pr of glasses has been used it will be non returnable because they are somewhat like underway. You wear it you keep. AVS would have to sterilize the glasses and then sell them as used. I would expect a restocking fee because they are cheap and the return will require a bunch of work. I will let you know.
I am shooting from the hip here because I really don`t know what management's position will be. I think it might be better for AVS to run some test themselves and report rather then ship and then get requests for a large number of returns. Thanks for everyone's understanding until Monday.
post #5904 of 8828
11/26/10 at 11:39pm
I checked the return policy set forth under AV Science store. It seems that whatever is the established policy on glasses will be set forth in a modification of that policy. AVS has not sold 3D glasses before to my knowledge and it is a unique animal like underwear. I`ll let everybody know on Monday.
post #5905 of 8828
11/26/10 at 11:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
I will inquire with Stwart on Monday re if and to what extent their various screen materials maintain polarization. Please refrain from flooding them with calls. I will do it early Monday AM and post. They might not post and then I will have to contact one of their engineers and get him to dig up a lcd projector and a polarizer and run tests on thier various fabrics. this might take a while but I will post updates when I know anything such as that they are running tests. I doubt the Stewart sales guys will have the info.

Re return policy on glasses I don`t know. That will await our Monday afternoon conference sales call. I suspect that once a pr of glasses has been used it will be non returnable because they are somewhat like underway. You wear it you keep. AVS would have to sterilize the glasses and then sell them as used. I would expect a restocking fee because they are cheap and the return will require a bunch of work. I will let you know.
I am shooting from the hip here because I really don`t know what management's position will be. I think it might be better for AVS to run some test themselves and report rather then ship and then get requests for a large number of returns. Thanks for everyone's understanding until Monday.
That would be awesome Mark! Looking forward to what you find out from Stewart since this will be key in determining which glasses those of us with Stewart screens should go with. Thanks again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
I checked the return policy set forth under AV Science store. It seems that whatever is the established policy on glasses will be set forth in a modification of that policy. AVS has not sold 3D glasses before to my knowledge and it is a unique animal like underwear. I`ll let everybody know on Monday.

Sounds good, thanks.
post #5906 of 8828
11/27/10 at 12:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
Thank you for this. There is some interesting information in the screen shots they provided - very good to get a look at those.

A few points of interest in particular:

1) One thing that jumped out at me is that there is now an Axis Position setting in the CMS. That's definitely new. Anyone know what benefit such a setting provides?

2) The measured gamuts looked good. THX mode looked reasonably well except for some error in magenta. There is a Standard CIE shown which looks even better. I wonder if that's a measurement he made after manually adjusting the CMS?

At any rate, that's a great start. However I'd really like to see the xyY values measured to know what the dE was. In particular, we cannot judge the accuracy of the colors from these graphs because there is no Y (luminance) value reflected in the CIE. That's why we need the values.

Does anyone know how to contact the author of that preview? Maybe they are an AVS member? I'd like to reach out and get more info - the specific measurements and calculate the dE. Ultimately this won't matter for those with calibration tools and skills because it can be dialed in great - I am quite confident in that. But for those without this it will be pretty important.

3) You can see the new Dark/Bright sliders. This must be for the low end / high end gamma tweaks we've read about. I found it interesting that in the screen shot the Dark slider was on 2 instead of 0. I wonder if that was a tweak made by the reviewer, or if 2 is indeed the default. I'd like to ask him.

4) Super White is shown as a new HDMI type. Anyone know what this is designed to provide? I think the PS3 has such a mode as well. I wonder if its designed to be paired with the PS3 in this mode and if so what comes out of it...?

5) I liked that 3D rendering was in his Positives column at the end of the article. Although it was a little confusing because in the Negatives column there was some stuff in there about 3D flicker and so forth.

I wasn't too happy to see his desire for better convergence controls listed in the Negatives column. I wonder if this means he had some convergence issues which were not uniform, and then was frustrated that the controls are still such that he couldn't improve on area of the screen without worsening another. I would think that if his convergence was uniform and very good in the first place, he wouldn't have gone looking at the controls and remarked about their lack of progress there. Humm.
Hi,

Measurements are available here.

http://www.homecinema-fr.com/Colorim...rojecteurs.xls


IMHO, it' interesting to compare to the HD 750 and the result is not really exciting
post #5907 of 8828
11/27/10 at 12:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toe View Post
Only if the firehawk maintains polarization to some degree which I dont think we know yet..........
While we don't know, I would be pretty surprised if it does not maintain at least some. Not sure if I would predict that it maintain the same as the High Contrast Matte White or the High Contrast Cinema Vision, but somewhere in that kind of range or even a little more would be my guess. I think the Firehawk is about 1.8 gain angular-reflective not counting the gray layer and I would expect it and other high gain screens from Stewart to maintain a fair amount of the polarization. But I don't know if they would even know which ones do and how much.

The screen that surprised me was the HD Progressive 1.1, which I believe is a Joe Kane screen. I didn't realize that it had the kind of makeup that would retain polarization.

--Darin
post #5908 of 8828
11/27/10 at 1:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post
Here's a little rant from Grant. If you don't like 3D then fine. No one is going to force you to watch it, so don't, but please keep your negativity to yourself. Some people just can't handle change. I'm fine with that, but I'm not fine with all the vociferous bitching so let the rest of us enjoy what we enjoy. Listen to yourselves complaining, and I'll bet you'll be surprised at how awful it is. If you have a spouse who is still with you then give her a kiss and some flowers because she certainly deserves something positive for putting up with the likes of you! End of rant.
That was GREAT! Well said. Hopefully "those" people will take your advice!
post #5909 of 8828
11/27/10 at 1:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

The screen that surprised me was the HD Progressive 1.1, which I believe is a Joe Kane screen. I didn't realize that it had the kind of makeup that would retain polarization.

--Darin
Likewise, and sounds very promising. I hope UMR gets a sample. He has the same opinion as I when it comes to screen materials. If it has at least as good of uniformity, and sharpness of a matte white screen, with no sheen, texture, or sparklies, I'd get one! It would be a great 2D screen with a lot of 3D benefit.
post #5910 of 8828
11/27/10 at 2:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Jones View Post
In a nearly totally dark room levels as low as 3 or 4 FL are considered adequate, but perhaps not ideal, for viewing 3D. Many commercial movie theaters go this low for 3D presentations when the loss thru the 3D glasses are considered. If you can get 8 to 10FL for 3D viewing then you will be much better off than most of us. THX in certifying the new JVC RS50 and RS60 models for 3D mode recommends the screen size (diagonal for a 16 x 9 projected image) be limited to 90 inches max if the screen gain is 1.0. Your setup if fully consistent with that recommendation, but you will need to keep the room dark for 3D viewing (think movie theater dark for ideal 3D viewing).
It will be interesting to see what my 150" 1.1 gain will look like with the 3D.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › JVC 2011 models & MSRP: RS40 50 60 & HD250.