The Sony VPL VW90ES 3D Owner's Thread - Page 3

Yes, the stereography in that is fantastic. It's a pretty good movie, too.

Joe

Do you think you see this because you are using a polarizing preserving screen (Silverstar is, I think, right?) I'm using a DaLite HP 2.8 screen, so is it possible the x103 would be no different than the Sony in terms of brightness? Or does the clip-on filter for the Sony glasses just block more light because of the multi-layer approach?

Just to prove: It's all about context!

Joe...if I went over and over it for 30 minutes "just testing"...I'd be in trouble... She'd be complaining!...lol.

Are the add on polarizers for the Sony vertical polarizers or horizontal?


Lets do a little test. If the glasses are not switched on and one turns the contrast down and looks through the glasses at the lens, which glasses are brighter? It would seem to me th at whatever glasses have the correct alignment with the light coming out of the Sony would be the brightness absent other things like how long the shutters are open when turned on.

Well it would all depend if you were passing or failing the test....

Anyway, looks like my 90 delivery is slipping to Thursday, so the anticipation continues a bit more. I bought a pair of x103's and will compare to the sony's on my HP screen.

Touche, my good man...touche! ...

Thrang - great setup, right up my alley.. HP screen (is this a cinema contour?) and a center mounted projector for max gain. This should be great for the 3D output and the light sucking shutter glasses. I am toying with a 3D DLP acer and an HTPC on the HP screen now and it looks great.

I am curious to hear your comments, especially with the HP screen on the new Sony. I have a JVC on pre-order, but 3D is going to be important and anxiously awaiting to hear the comparisons of both projectors. Maybe it will be worth spring the extra $$ if the Sony turns out to be the better 3D projector.

btw, nice 10+ TB NAS, I am right there with you with similar storage. My entire archive is accessible through a single interface in MCE7 and just added the Quad Ceton tuner.

Yes, 133 Cinema Contour. With my current 85, I'm running in low lamp mode, typically MotionFlow 2 (which reduces brightness), and manual iris between 0 and 40 depending upon content - so I'm hoping I have the headroom for compensation once I enter the dark and murky world of 3D (plus, the 90es is alleged to be 25 brighter than the 85, which further helps)

We'll see...(whether I see adequately or dimly is another story...)

How's that Ceton tuner? Was considering that...

I should also be getting mine on thursday Were both most likely getting it from the first shipment to Canada. It shipped from Vancouver instead of Toronto and thats why it was delayed a few days. Hopefully they don't stomp kick the **** out of the box before it gets here (many Sony haters around)

I think FI in 3D is going to be HUGE feature. I watched some underwater and nature stuff on a flat panel sony with FI in 3D and WOW. The sense of immersion is magnified alot when you add FI to 3D. Everything becomes even more real. Animation also benefits a lot(70% of 3D is animation right now) from FI. They even showed some stupid live action movie with ferrets, or hedgehogs in hamster balls with FI on and again the 3D effect was amazing more fluid. The soap Opera effect doesnt seem as bad in 3D for some reason. Maybe because 3D is supposed to be more "realistic" live action movies with FI in 3D aren't as soapy looking as FI without 3D which I can't stand.

I hope to post a review this weekend and I do have an Acer to compare it too. It's too bad an HP screen won't work with my setup (8 foot ceiling mounted projector and the screen is 12 feet away close to the ceiling) Gotta wait for some new type of screen I guess. Im not obsessed with lumens like some people on this forum. I actually like a dim picture for some reason in my batcave (so dark I can't see my hand in front of my face with lights off) I run my Epson in Natural low mode with over 2000 hours on the lamp and it's way more then bright enough for my Carada 1.4 screen. I know im getting under 400 lumens in 2D and it's fine. Hopefully 200 will be enough for 3D

Also, not to start a vs. JVC thing again, but Im not sure why MANY people have said that the JVC is much brighter in 3D then the Sony, when Ekki measured both the Sony and JVC at around 220 lumens in 3D and said that ghosting was less visible on one or the other, depending on the scene. Seems like a draw for 3D, other then the FI in 3D which Ekki really liked on the Sony. Also remember the Samsung flat panels had crazy ghosting on them and much of that was fixed with firmware updates to better sync the glasses. If enough people complain their will also most likely be updates to help with corsstalk. To bad firmware can't fix light loss?

The sony glasses are vertical, but the projector is circular. So theres no change of brightness with horizontal versus vertical polarized glasses (or tilting the head). It's equally dim I don't know why measurements puts the JVC and Sony as equally bright... But I can say, intuitively, I don't feel like I'm getting anywhere close to 170 lumens with the sony glasses.

If you hate what FI does to 2D live action movies, you're going to hate what FI does to 3D live action movies even more. I'm not saying that FI can't enhance certain kinds of content, but I'm saying it absolutely ruins some 3D content.

To be clear, by FI we're referring to the Motion Enhancer feature on the Sony's?

I'm sure it's not usable because of the light loss, but is the Film Projection Mode (Motionflow/Dark Frame Insertion) available in 3D?

I think Sony's implementation of FI (Motion Enhancer) is much better than what I saw with Epson (1080UB and 9500). I use the Motion Enhancer in Low or High mode for all sports, and low or off for other content.

Film Projection Mode is well implemented on the 85 as well, and helps smooth out motion on film content without the Spanish-novella effect. But because of the light loss, I doubt this is usable in 3d...

Maybe you should try the Xpand glasses. Petri and Ekki both measured over 200 in bright mode. I can't remember the measurements for the JVC.

Yes FI ruins the film look but I kinda liked the extra 3dishness it adds to even live action. It's not like were going to watch serious dramas in 3D anyway. It's mostly nonsense like Pirranha 3D or Resident Evil anyway right now. It would reduce all judder even at low mode with Soap effect. Only high mode gives Soap effect.

black frame insertion is what causes light loss, not FI. There are modes on the sony that allow both to be active at the same time (light loss) or you can just turn on the FI without the BFI and there is no light loss.

Yes, I know - I was asking if DFI was even an option in 3D...

I most definitely want to. Can't wait to see what Scorsese manages to do with 3D.

I figured this would be the case for live action movies, but how about IMAX type 3d films Petri? I would think FI in 3d for this type of material (as well as concerts, sports, etc......) would bring it to the next level since realism is the name of the game with these documentaries.

Joe, The Xpand you think look better than the sony's ? We saw the Xpand on our Pana 65 3d and thought they looked aweful..

As far as shuttering... They all have to shutter at the same rate, the speed is determined by the frame rate and its fixed and synced by the Led Flashers, otherwise you wouldn't see it in 3d ..

Let me know what you think over the next week as I have been pushing the sony glasses but if you think the Xpands are better , i will have to get some to look at again.

Thanks
craig

Thanks Joe.

At this point, you've probably run through every bit of whatever little 3D content there is...finding out anything more, good or bad, with your overall experiences/settings...?

That's an assumption I can't agree with at all. It's pretty easy to argue that Avatar is a serious drama (although you'll get plenty of disagreement on the quality of the story and the storytelling). I'll take it one step further and say that the 3D in Avatar works best in support of the most dramatic and personal interactions in the film. During a hunting scene, when Jake turns his head and looks at Neytiri, and she backs away, we have a silent and wonderful romantic moment of insight between them. It's deeply emotional. For me, 3D adds powerfully to the intensity of this scene, and it remains one of my favorite scenes for that very reason. I look forward to many more live action 3D films in which 3D brings us closer to the characters and their feelings. That we haven't had a lot of that yet doesn't mean the potential is not there.

Ironically, I think one of the best ways to increase the use of 3D to enhance a viewer's personal, emotional connection to a story may be for its critics to continue insisting 3D can't do it. I think artists relish doing things most people say can't be done. It's a myth destined for the trash heap.

I see your point regarding dramas. It would have to be used by a talented filmaker that would not abuse the 3d effect. Imagine Kibrick had access to 3d?!?'. I really meant to say that the trend for 3d movies is to only do 3d for animation, horror, and action. I think we are some time away before we see our first drama in 3d.


Now for the good news. My Sony has arrived!! I will pick it up tommorrow. Sony vs. Acer round 1.

"It's pretty easy to argue that Avatar is a serious drama (although you'll get plenty of disagreement on the quality of the story and the storytelling). "

If the quality of story and storytelling is arguable then how can it be a serious drama?
District 9 is a superior film in every way imho :P
I would like to see a real movie done in 3d. How about a war movie like Apocalypse Now or Saving private Ryan?

Maybe I'm the only one interested in seeing recreation of Shakespeare and other plays in 3d. Make it look like I'm watching a stage with depth.

Of course maybe the new generation will grow up loving spastic videogame movies. Too busy texting to really care about a good story anyways.