or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Screenshots from ProjectorReviews
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Screenshots from ProjectorReviews

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
I am considering buying a new projector and I have it narrowed down to the HC4000 and the Epson 8350. Out of curiosity I opened up the two reviews from ProjectorReviews on both models in two seperate browsers windows. I found the similar screenshots and clicked back and forth between the two. I was very suprised at the difference especially the Casino Royal shots. In the 8350 review it looks like Bond has a tan and in the HC4000 he looks pale dead white by comparision. I realize that screenshots have to be taken with a grain of salt but shouldn't the color be similar. Doesn't ProjectorReviews accurately calibrate these projectors before they are reviewed. Why is there such a difference and which one is accurate compared to what the movie director was seeing that day.
post #2 of 19
take 2 identical projectors and calibrate them with identical equipment and there will still be slight differences due to manufacturing tolerances .. check Jason's response to a similar question in the calibration forum
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post19575822
and another interesting read
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1287957
post #3 of 19
Screen shots are about as useful as tits on a bull. In the narrative of the Bond shots, he explains how each pic looks different due to the different lighting. Maybe you clicked on the wrong pic. DO NOT pick your projector based on screen shots.
post #4 of 19
Thread Starter 
In the narrative I believe that he is talking about the lighting source when the movie was shot and not the lighting source in his home. Each pic looks different across the same projector but the same pic across the two projectors should be more similar in my opinion if they are both calibrated. I would assume that when ProjectorReviews does these reviews that as many variables as possible are eliminated (same camera, viewing environment, image source, etc.). These are not slight differences in my opinion, they are major differences with regard to color. In one shot it looks like Bond is blushing and in the other it looks like he is deadly pale. Is it really possible that two calibrated projectors could produce such a difference? If the answer is yes then what is the point in doing a calibration?
post #5 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsims2719 View Post

I would assume .....

There is the mistake..
You can bet your life savings a full ISF calibration is not done before review. If it was it would be clearly stated!
post #6 of 19
Thread Starter 
According to the site this is the equipment that he uses;

Test equipment first: I use the Avia Pro Test Suite of disks, and the Optic One light meter (about $2500 worth of hardware/software) and a tripod for mounting the meter. I also have the basic Avia calibration disk that consumers buy ($49.95 retails), mostly used quickly to see if that basic package will allow a decent calibration for end users. In addition I use the Silicon Optix HQV test disks, and the beta version of their 1080 HQV test disk, for checking image noise, motion artifacts, jaggies, cadances, etc
post #7 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsims2719 View Post

According to the site this is the equipment that he uses;

Test equipment first: I use the Avia Pro Test Suite of disks, and the Optic One light meter (about $2500 worth of hardware/software) and a tripod for mounting the meter. I also have the basic Avia calibration disk that consumers buy ($49.95 retails), mostly used quickly to see if that basic package will allow a decent calibration for end users. In addition I use the Silicon Optix HQV test disks, and the beta version of their 1080 HQV test disk, for checking image noise, motion artifacts, jaggies, cadances, etc

I'm pretty sure he just does a basic calibration where he sets contrast, brightness, and grayscale to get it close to D65 as possible. He doesn't do a full calibration where you also calibrate colors and gamma. Not all projectors have a full CMS that is required to get accurate colors. That's a more in-depth, time consuming process so he doesn't do it for reviews.
post #8 of 19
Thread Starter 
In my opinion if the images being projected are that different to the viewer due to lack of proper calibration then there is no point in reviewing them.
post #9 of 19
The best place for reviews is here and other a/v forums where users talk about their actual experiences with whatever projector you're looking at. If you see a glowing "pro" review, yet a 1000 posts here about what kind of trouble people are having with their new projector, then you've gotten all the real world info you need. Whatever product I buy, user reviews are my bible if I can't see or hear it in person. "Professional" reviews are fun to read, but that's it....IMO only.
post #10 of 19
If you can get the Epson 8350 for below even it's low street price (hint: you can, almost everywhere) then there's really no choice to be made anyway, nothing remotely comes close to it for the price. I recently went though this very same process, evaluating all the new stuff, the higher priced models, yadda yadda yadda. Been thinking about this since last year when the AE4000u came out.

I couldn't be more pleased with the 8350.
post #11 of 19
My two favorite bond shots from the reviews are from the W6000 Link and the HC5500 Link. Those are the two shots I always compare other reviews on the site to.

And here is the same shot with the 8350. The 8350 shot almost looks blurry compared to the other two.
post #12 of 19
Thread Starter 
In my opinion the HC5500 looks the best or most life like. To me that should be the goal of any projector or display device which is to accurately render the images so that they appear real. Again, without proper calibration of each individual projector, reviewing them becomes a complete waste of time. The most popular projector on this site right now is the 8350 but to me it looks the worst out of the three screenshots. In comparision to the HC5500 it just looks bad. The question then becomes, is this real. Is this actually what the reviewer was seeing and is this the optimum performance of both machines. If the answer is no to both questions then this review site is worthless.
post #13 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McC View Post

Screen shots are about as useful as tits on a bull.

DO NOT pick your projector based on screen shots.

!!! LOL !!!!

Very True

Screenshots are to give you an idea of the performance and Art uses them in support of his written review. Better to read his comments on the performance of the projector....that will give more resources to make a better decision.
post #14 of 19
+1; we all have our favorite child.

Though I do see RBE, but favors the DLP look. I had the 3800, so the 4000 will give you slightly better contrast. The Epson will be quieter and has no or little light spill, but the 4000 will give you a better picture/viewing experience; may even be sharper.

My current PJs are the Sony HW10 (LCoS) and an old Infocus IN76 720 DLP) but trying to go back to a JVC. For what its worth, I like the Infocus picture better than the 3800.

We all have our own bias. If RBE is not an issue, my pick is the 4000 at a higher price point but my boss said no.

It's a grand time we're in, with so many affordable choices. Cheers.
post #15 of 19
Thread Starter 
I would go even farther. If all projectors aren't properly calibrated, reviews become about as useful as "tits on a bull". This is a hugh variable which will significantly bias the reviewers opinion. I would equate it to an automobile comparision where some of the cars have insufficient tire pressure.
post #16 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsims2719 View Post
In my opinion the HC5500 looks the best or most life like. To me that should be the goal of any projector or display device which is to accurately render the images so that they appear real. Again, without proper calibration of each individual projector, reviewing them becomes a complete waste of time.
The thing about the HC5500 pic (and others posted in the Screenshot War!!!!!!!), it shows details that you wouldn't even know were there by looking at alot of the other projectors with the same scene. I want to see the pores on someones face and details like individual strands of hair. The HC5500 looks almost 3D compared to the same scene with the 8350.

Is it the projector, the video processor, a really good blu-ray player, a $$$ screen?
post #17 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBQ7 View Post
The thing about the HC5500 pic (and others posted in the Screenshot War!!!!!!!), it shows details that you wouldn't even know were there by looking at alot of the other projectors with the same scene. I want to see the pores on someones face and details like individual strands of hair. The HC5500 looks almost 3D compared to the same scene with the 8350.

Is it the projector, the video processor, a really good blu-ray player, a $$$ screen?
Have you seen both in person??

I have the the 8350 and I can say from first had experience that it is very sharp! Though it might not be sharper than most DLPs, it is still sharper than most LCDs, except the Mits.

I have seen the hc6000 and yes, it was very very sharp (The same optics as the hc5500)...This one does not make me miss it one bit. It shows a very detailed picture!!
As far as colors go, this one is very very good. Not much is needed to change for optimum video. Art from projectorrevies.com says that skin tones and color are very good. compared to previous Epson models.
post #18 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bsims2719 View Post

According to the site this is the equipment that he uses;

Test equipment first: I use the Avia Pro Test Suite of disks, and the Optic One light meter (about $2500 worth of hardware/software) and a tripod for mounting the meter. I also have the basic Avia calibration disk that consumers buy ($49.95 retails), mostly used quickly to see if that basic package will allow a decent calibration for end users. In addition I use the Silicon Optix HQV test disks, and the beta version of their 1080 HQV test disk, for checking image noise, motion artifacts, jaggies, cadances, etc

IIRC the Optic One, as stated, is a light meter. Not a color meter. Meaning it can measure lumens and such, for light output and contrast measurements...not for measuring colors and white point for calibration.

That being said, you cannot tell anything really from screenshots.

And as an aside...I like my bulls with big tits...
post #19 of 19
Thread Starter 
I really wish there was a major electronics chain that sold projectors and had a viewing room where you could demo calibrated projectors. To me this is the major obstacle with this technology is that you have to buy equipment sight unseen. Imagine having a dedicated room with the top five projectors in your price range and you could scroll through them as you played your favorite Bluray.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Projectors - Under $3,000 USD MSRP › Screenshots from ProjectorReviews