JVC RS40/X3 Calibration Thread - Page 9

- Hours: 752
- Delivery: Dec 8th 2010
- Screen size: 128"
- Throw lens/screen: 14' give or take a few inches...
- Natural mode
- Color space: normal
- Gamma normal
- High Lamp
- Iris fully open (0)
- I did a very quick calibration from white levels (using the Lumagen mini)

I did not do an ANSI reading cause I was running against the clock.

The reading at center screen shows 115 lux or 519 Lumens.

What is the screen gain for that setup zbroke, 1.3?

Yes. Stewart ST130 G3.

Yes. Trying to type too fast and I'm getting tangled in terminology. I basically followed your instructions:

Natural mode (as set by JVC)
6500k
Standard color
Gamma Normal

Sorry for the confusion. I wil ledit my original post.

That's still impressive. I am also at near shortest throw, and my RS50 cannot manage more than 550 lumens with a brand new lamp. It dropped to 360 lumens in 220 hours.

This futher proves the RS50/RS60 is dimmer than than the RS40 by a good margin.

I remember reading something on here concerning a setting on the RS40 that needs to be set for 3D so it will function properly with your specific screen type. I searched the thread but can not find it.

I have a Stewart StudioTech 1.3, what is the setting I am talking about and what should it be set to for my screen type? Or point me to the info and I can look it up.

thanks,

I found it: http://www.jvc.eu/dla-x/screen_ajustment.html#x3

thanks

Thanks...

I am using an HTPC with my RS40. If I set the hdmi mode to enhanced to allow 0-255 do I still tune down brightness for a floor at 16. So I also tune up contrast for a peak level at 235? It seems to my eye that I am getting some black and white crush when I do this for blu-ray playback. Does my PC stretch the video levels to 0-255?

I am sure there are threads on this topic, but I thought someone might have a quick answer here.

Has anybody calibrated the RS40's 3D mode?

Im curoius, since lumens are so precious in 3D, if its even worth it?

Ive got a da lite high power [72" tall] [2.4 gain], so maybe it might still be woth calibrating 3D?

EDIT: Also, are people getting 700-800 lumens after calibrating the actual colors [cms via external processor]? Or is the 700-800 only after D65 calibration?

I did a learning session and a quick calibration with the I1 LT and ColorHCFR software today.

A big thank-you to Ron for the how-to and what's required, to the CurtPalme link for the step-by-step, as well as to the other contributors to this thread. I've never done a manual calibration before, but it's painless once you get the hang of the software, and the results speak for themselves. So definitely worth the time and effort, especially if you have some geek genes and enjoy this sort of stuff like I do.

I aimed for a pretty flat 2.22 gamma / 6500K on my first calibration, and am quite happy with the results for a first go-round. I'll post some pics tomorrow of the before/after graphs. I think I'm going to try a second calibration that boosts to a higher gamma above 20% but keeps the gamma near ~2.22 for the darker shades.

That's the wrong way ! Try a sRGB gradation. That lightens the IREs from 10-30 up.

I have calibrated my X3 (= RS40) with a gamma of 2.2 in a batcave. But i loose details in the darker areas. So a sRGB gradation looks much better.

FYI,

the i1 Display 2 is selling for a good price at Buy.com. Plus with their exclusive $25 rebate the net price is near the same as the i1 LT.

I don't know what this means...

I'm happy with the shadow detail I currently get (after yesterday's calibration) at ~2.22, but after reading some of the other posts previously, it seemed that some also like running a gamma of 2.3 or even 2.4 for the other (non-shadow) areas - is that what the sRGB will give me?

Something I've noticed in my tinkering with the RS40:

Some advice was given earlier in this thread about always going into the negatives when you adjust offset - that raising a value above zero will raise your black floor.

While this is true, using this technique created a problem for me. If you adjust offset by only using the negative values, you'll be in a position where you're either losing the last one or two black values (crush), or you'll have to increase your brightness, and the black floor will come up notably. The offset steps are much finer than the brightness steps (by maybe a factor of 10).

After calibrating, my offsets were red -12, green -8, blue 0. That crushed 17 and 18. In order to see 17, I needed to bump brightness to +1. That raised the black floor.

I started making adjustments one click at a time in offset and brightness, and found the values that gave me the darkest blacks and still allowed me to see value 17 was to set the green offset at zero (brightness also at zero), and adjust the other offsets around it. For me at least, this technique offered me the best black while still being able to see the 17 value.

I believe that advice was given elsewhere - either in this thread or in the Curt Palme thread, but at least for me I can say that this gave the best results. I didn't start there - I worked backwards from my original calibration, trying to maximize blacks and still see 17, and that's where I ended up. So at least in my experience, that technique seems valid.

One step in brightness seemed to represent roughly ten points in offset, though I didn't accurately measure that.

As always, ymmv, and please keep in mind that I'm VERY new to all this. It may be of some importance that I was adjusting one value (red) lower than green, and the other (blue) higher, so I guess I was raising the blue floor somewhat but maximized the black level of the other colours. If I was in a position where I had to adjust both other colours above green, my results may have been different.

Just a hint ...

- do not use the offset controlers
- adjust brightness and contrast at first
- display a 100 IRE test pattern
- use the GAIN controlers to adjust RGB to 100%
- check brightness and contrast again
- use the gamma equalizer to set the IREs from 10 till 90 percent. DO NOT touch the 100 IRE !

wow - this is very different from the Curt Palme method of setting gain at 80% and offset at 30%...

If this is the best way to do it, I'll need to schedule a few more hours of free time and start from scratch.

No, not different The problem is the OFFSET: you should NEVER increase it because it destroys the black level. The same with the GAIN: you can only decrease it which (usually) costs luminance.

The standard method is 30/80, that's correct. But you should not only use the GAIN / OFFSET controlers. The best way is to use the service menu of the X3. So you can also increase "GAIN".

Instead of increasing the OFFSET controlers, use the gamma equalizer of the X3. That does not destroy the black level.

It's also very important to set the WHITE LEVEL (100 IRE) at first.

I am using a Lumagen Radiance. That's the best choice, but also very expensive.

And remember, you can also adjust the gamut via the service menu

Can you post a general approach for calibrating using the Lumagen? Which parts of the calibration are done on the projector and which parts on the Lumagen? Is there a best starting point on the X3 before you start using the Lumagen? Thanks.

Do I have a light cannon (as far as these current JVC models go) or just insane?

My Setup:
- 3 month old RS40 @ 21.5ft throw distance, 230 lamp hours.
- Screen size 110" (54"x96"), projector lens half way up to screen top - so not centered
- a Mastech LX1330B lux meter

I took some very quick center screen measurements and used the Lux to Lumens Calc.xls:

- 3D preset w/ high lamp: 203 lux = 805 lumens

- Natural preset
w/low lamp : 106 lux = 421 lumens
w/high lamp: 168 lux = 666 lumens

- User1 / Custom (Tom Huffman's calibration. see in post #28 - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...0&postcount=28)
w/low lamp : 103 lux = 409 lumens
w/high lamp: 165 lux = 655 lumens
= consistent 3 lux less than the Natural preset for both low/high lamp mode.

In post #28, Ron Huffman said he got 650 lumens in the High lamp mode for this same projector and somewhere around 14-15ft throw distance. I that was the full 9 point sample averaging whereas I only center measured 1 spot where it is the brightest. But still... after 230 hours and visibly less bright than originally, this PJ seems to be doing quite well based on today's center measurements @ 21.5ft. No?

My X-Rite i1 Display 2 ($162) arrived today, so more toys to play with and a learning curve on how to do calibrations myself. that will be amusing. Setting out initially with the freebee HCFR Colorimeter as I don't have any other.

Hi,

420 lumens seem to be a logical result at D65 in low mode.

There is same result here:

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

IMHO, it's disappointing compare to an HD1 and an HD 950 or more to an HD 750.

Not sure I understand the reference to that xls spreadsheet which is for a Sony HW20, and or for that matter strange to be discussing the other HD projectors too. Since this thread is discussing RS40 calibration, perhaps your comparison discussion should be in another thread.

One point is that moving the RS40 to minimum throw (some 10ft closer) should increase the lumens 20-25%. So adding another 100 lumens to my results seems to indicate a stronger than average level. Just sayin, apparently this PJ seems to be doing better than average. No?

Hi,

a summary is on the first sheet and there are X3 (RS40) measures on another sheet

Hi,

Do you happen to know whether the lumens displayed on the summary sheet are ANSI lumens or the peak center of screen lumens?

Do you know whether these measurements were for a single projector or an average of a sampling of multiple projectors?

Thanks.

Larry