or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony VPL-vw1000 - Page 129

post #3841 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

ITS whole not hole. Thank God the whole golf hole is level. Now that would be a level hole with my post dragging down the thread by a whole level. Would this be a post hole or a whole post?smile.gif



redface.gif Sorry - my french is better .............................................................................................( actully NOT wink.gif )

and thanks for dragging it down a Whole level

And at least I'm not the only one lost here (I feel really at home and welcome smile.gif )

dj
post #3842 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifiaudio2 View Post

As I watched Sherlock Holmes 2 tonight, I noticed lots of the same odd looking / grainy, skin that I noticed in Amazing Spiderman. Its almost like a posterization in the skin. So I started messing with the iris settings. Going from auto full all the way to IRIS off completely eliminates the issue. I think even going to auto limited from full mostly eliminates it.. need to test further. But what would cause the FULL setting to look bad?
I don't remember this being an issue at all months ago on my previous setup (which was on a HP screen vs the EN4k material I have now). Not sure if that has anything to do with it or not....

I thought this whole movie was full of what you all have been talking about in last few pages. I noticed it in quite a few movies and chalked it up as production issues with a lot of grain. I didn't notice anything in prometheus but only watched it in 3D.
post #3843 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

ITS whole not hole. Thank God the whole golf hole is level. Now that would be a level hole with my post dragging down the thread by a whole level. Would this be a post hole or a whole post?smile.gif

Lol thanks for spell checking. iPhone will change my spelling to unthinkable things but yet won't catch something this simple.

Thanks a whole lot again. Too many beers whilemessing around in the theater after a long day with sick baby.
post #3844 of 9693
The switch from HP has something to do with what you see now. That material despite its many positive attributes tends to hide certain details that the projector can display with the right set up and screen. These are subtle aspects of PQ that many people just can't see with their HP screens.
post #3845 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

The switch from HP has something to do with what you see now. That material despite its many positive attributes tends to hide certain details that the projector can display with the right set up and screen. These are subtle aspects of PQ that many people just can't see with their HP screens.

I do think that is possible here.

One thing I do notice is that, despite being a good bit less bright than the HP I had, 3D looks BETTER with this EN4k screen. I think it has something to do with the way the image seems to come from just a bit behind the screen instead of sitting on its surface. 3D really seems to float.
post #3846 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

I assume the projector has a switch mode power supply that that high frequency noise can leak back over the mains and contaminate everything. However, there are a variety of ways to solve noise leakage WITHOUT projector modification such as proper design of the mains and the grounding and keeping audio power seperate from power feeding vidio. Obviously using such as think as a lemagen you can also strip all the audio off HDMI and feed only HDMI video to the projector. i aemployee both of these things and I do believe HDMI cable can affect both the video and the sound but i am not going there in this thread.
Not only do I keep an open mind, I am willing to use whatever is left of my main.
I am curious what mods they are doing to improve the video performance of the projector. I am sure the projector can be improved by using something better somewhere in the projector.

Actually mark they are well versed in mains noise reduction. I will ask again specifically what mods they are doing
post #3847 of 9693
In post 2295 there's a screen shot of info from the menu. How / where did u get this. Mine doesn't show same. I'm in UK

Also how do u enter the service menu. Enter enter left enter doesn't work

Thx
post #3848 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecossecableman View Post

In post 2295 there's a screen shot of info from the menu. How / where did u get this. Mine doesn't show same. I'm in UK

Also how do u enter the service menu. Enter enter left enter doesn't work

Thx

Its the screen you see under info when you are in the service menu.

You should start with no menu up and press enter, enter, left arrow enter. A message will appear asking you if you want to enter never never land, whoops the service meny. Select yes, enter. Then hit the menu and go down to info. The menu looks the same but the some of the names get chsanged etc. To get into the meat of the service menu, arrow down one below and info icon.
post #3849 of 9693
Many thx mark. Ill try that.

I got a note back from germany re "noise" and although they explain what they believe is causing problems they don't identify yet what solutions they are carrying out - so I 'll wait to hear from them specific info on this before I post some more

However I found this an intriguing comment "The problems are on the ground of the whole system and in the shielding...
This produces visible solarisation effects in the picture and a big influence on highend soundsystems..."
post #3850 of 9693
^^^^

I wonder if this ground issue is causing some of what I have been experiencing. After getting all of my new system up and running I found a hum that ONLY exists when HDMI goes from my equipment rack to the projector. I can also eliminate the hum, I finally found, but unplugging the grounded Cisco switch (whether I plug it into the same circuit or not), but the hum also goes away if I unplug the projector or remove the HDMI cable from it. Again, I didn't experience the hum on my old setup, so maybe its some combination of a ground issue that still exists even after removing the switch that is why I am getting these odd polarization effects in my images still.

Maybe I will try lifting the ground on the projector with a cheater plug and see if any of what I am seeing goes away. The projector and the switch are the only grounded products in my equipment setup, other than the Seaton speakers that are on their own circuits.
Edited by hifiaudio2 - 1/10/13 at 9:29am
post #3851 of 9693
Sounds like you're creating an HDMI loop. Does unplugging your processor to amp help the problem, and going direct ....
post #3852 of 9693
I haven't heard of a HDMI loop. But if the HDMI cable touches the projector whether its from the Oppo or from the Marantz processor's output, I get the hum / buzz. Like I said, unplugging my switch also takes the buzz away. I am getting one of those long PDU units from Middle Atlantic so I can make sure this is all on the same circuit. I will see if that changes anything.


On another note, I was going to attempt a quick calibration to see if what I am seeing is a gamma issue, but ended up not really having time. What I did get to do was measure light output on my new EN4k screen for the first time.

With my Colormunki spectro and Calman 5, on a windowed 100 IRE pattern with IRIS off, and in reference mode with contrast set at 89 and no other "features" on, I get 11 FtL.

If I push contrast to max, which as you all know causes clipping, I get 13 ftL.

With contrast at 89, engaging Film projection mode, which I do like the look of, drops the output to 7.48 ftL, so I guess I will leave that off from now on when I am watching a scope movie.

This was all with the image stretched to fill my 160" W 2:37 screen. I have not measured the 16:9 image yet.

Bulb has 15 hours on it.
post #3853 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifiaudio2 View Post

I haven't heard of a HDMI loop. But if the HDMI cable touches the projector whether its from the Oppo or from the Marantz processor's output, I get the hum / buzz. Like I said, unplugging my switch also takes the buzz away. I am getting one of those long PDU units from Middle Atlantic so I can make sure this is all on the same circuit. I will see if that changes anything.


On another note, I was going to attempt a quick calibration to see if what I am seeing is a gamma issue, but ended up not really having time. What I did get to do was measure light output on my new EN4k screen for the first time.

With my Colormunki spectro and Calman 5, on a windowed 100 IRE pattern with IRIS off, and in reference mode with contrast set at 89 and no other "features" on, I get 11 FtL.

If I push contrast to max, which as you all know causes clipping, I get 13 ftL.

With contrast at 89, engaging Film projection mode, which I do like the look of, drops the output to 7.48 ftL, so I guess I will leave that off from now on when I am watching a scope movie.

This was all with the image stretched to fill my 160" W 2:37 screen. I have not measured the 16:9 image yet.

Bulb has 15 hours on it.

Wow, that's a big screen!

I'm absolutely blown away by my EN4K screen. It's a high-quality product, at an aggressive price, with top-notch customer service, and it's as "future proofed" as a screen can get. What more could you ask for?
post #3854 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac_hs10 View Post

How big is your EN4K?

I've got a 124.4 diagonal, 1.78 EN4K. If I didn't play as many games or watch as much TV, I would have gone with a 2.35-- just couldn't justify it based on my usage.
Edited by BrianMundt - 1/10/13 at 3:51pm
post #3855 of 9693
Got my first issue today.

Watching sky sports HD ( in the UK) and the ticker along to bottom kept going in and out of focus. I checked and film mode is off. I'm using the TV setting

Can this be fixed?

Any help appreciated
post #3856 of 9693
Might the ticker be separately sourced in SD and the issue is with the source not the display?
post #3857 of 9693
I was thinking this could be an issue with the dynamic iris similar to those when people have it enabled when there are subtitles being used. It may look like it's going in and out of focus but maybe the change in brightness on fixed text makes it look like it's going in and out of focus. Try disabling the dynamic iris to see if the issue is alleviated.
post #3858 of 9693
I think its dofferent resolutions. I have a problem with ESPN scrawl. The ESPN signal is 720p 60. The scrawl (text at bottom of screen telling scores, news etc) jumps like judder. No smother flow. Motion control as no effect on it.
Edited by mark haflich - 1/11/13 at 5:12pm
post #3859 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter_29 View Post

I will give it a shot. What scene? Prometheus in Ref mode made my iris go nuts in a few scenes and I had to turn it off.
This was the same scene that my iris was unhappy with. I checked cinema and ref and it did it on both.
post #3860 of 9693
Dyni
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

I was thinking this could be an issue with the dynamic iris similar to those when people have it enabled when there are subtitles being used. It may look like it's going in and out of focus but maybe the change in brightness on fixed text makes it look like it's going in and out of focus. Try disabling the dynamic iris to see if the issue is alleviated.[/qu
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

I was thinking this could be an issue with the dynamic iris similar to those when people have it enabled when there are subtitles being used. It may look like it's going in and out of focus but maybe the change in brightness on fixed text makes it look like it's going in and out of focus. Try disabling the dynamic iris to see if the issue is alleviated.

Iris is off but no change unfortunately
post #3861 of 9693
. It's the Denon avp! It's doing interlacing and obviously can't handle it properly. I wonder why. As soon as I went direct from Sky HD box to Sony it fixed it.

You would have thought de-Iing in the processor would be better than sending direct to Sony. I guess not!
post #3862 of 9693
I really thought the denon would be better but it isn't. I set it to pass though and voila. Problem solved!
post #3863 of 9693
H
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Hi guys. A few thoughts.

I don't agree that problem solving, design, and proving to myself or to others how stupid (most often) or smart (rarely) I am is fun. Watching is fun.

I can't for the life of me see why anyone would want to end up with a geometrically distorted image. We are not talking spend thrift installations when you have a 1000ES. Use masking even if it is velcro to the frame panels that one has to install and remove. The lazy man's (me) solution is motorized masking. It isn't all that expensive though it isn't cheap.

I can't imagine wanting to zoom and send active parts of the image off screen just to fill the entire screen in one direction that is not filled. You guys are talking large screens here. One viewer sitting up close. Who cares (and you shouldn't care) if your image only fills 20 ft instead of 22 or whatever. Sitting at the distances you are talking about you simply can't see the unlit horizontal width portion you might have left. Horizontal (top and bottom unlit) is very annoying. So zoom it out to fill vertically and if it isn't wide enough to fill, tuck it or use masking if you are obsessive. Movie theaters have moveable side panels. At least there are seating positions far enough away that unlit sides ogf the screen would be visable. But not in the instances I am reading about here with 1SW seating distances and six mile (sorry less than that in reality) wide screens.


Let's see if I understand this. Throw part of the image away, part of the artistic intent, so you can fill the entire width of your screen?. Then turn your head to the side and feel content that yup my full screen s lit. then back to the center to watch the movie and never again viewing those lit ends? I might get it if you are seating at 3 SW and can see the whole width without swiveling your head but at 1 SW?

Having just read your post Mark im wondering of I'm doing things wrong. I have a 1:85:1 screen. Presently I select 2:35 for say, a 16:9, source. The image zooms out past the screen so I zoom back to fit. Then i shift the image down to meet the screen bottom and only have a blank at the top,which i prefer

Yes/ no?

Thx in advance
post #3864 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecossecableman View Post

H
Having just read your post Mark im wondering of I'm doing things wrong. I have a 1:85:1 screen. Presently I select 2:35 for say, a 16:9, source. The image zooms out past the screen so I zoom back to fit. Then i shift the image down to meet the screen bottom and only have a blank at the top,which i prefer

Yes/ no?

Thx in advance


My screen is 2.0 (144x72), and for 16x9 sources I also select 2.35 (giving a 17x9 pic) and zoom to fill the vertical dimension, having a 136x72 pic.    I thus have a 8" wide vertical black bar on one side for which I insert a masking panel  to take care of it.   I do loose a few inches of the pic at the top/bottom, but I find this quite insignificant.    I know that Mark doesn't care for this solution, but I like it.

 

For 2.35 pics I remove the masking panel and zoom to fill the horizontal dimension, thus having a 144x62 pic.    I lens shift the pic to the bottom edge of the screen, having a ~10" black bar at the top of the screen, but I ignore this; at the top, it's quite unobjectionable (at least for me).   

 

This is how I've chosen to deal with things.   Others choose other approaches, so you should just decide for yourself what works best for you.

post #3865 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post


My screen is 2.0 (144x72), and for 16x9 sources I also select 2.35 (giving a 17x9 pic) and zoom to fill the vertical dimension, having a 136x72 pic.    I thus have a 8" wide vertical black bar on one side for which I insert a masking panel  to take care of it.   I do loose a few inches of the pic at the top/bottom, but I find this quite insignificant.    I know that Mark doesn't care for this solution, but I like it.

For 2.35 pics I remove the masking panel and zoom to fill the horizontal dimension, thus having a 144x62 pic.    I lens shift the pic to the bottom edge of the screen, having a ~10" black bar at the top of the screen, but I ignore this; at the top, it's quite unobjectionable (at least for me).   

This is how I've chosen to deal with things.   Others choose other approaches, so you should just decide for yourself what works best for you.

Thankyou Miller. I read the to and fro with you and Mark that's why I also wanted his response to how I'm doing it and if he suggests I try a different approach
post #3866 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecossecableman View Post

H
Having just read your post Mark im wondering of I'm doing things wrong. I have a 1:85:1 screen. Presently I select 2:35 for say, a 16:9, source. The image zooms out past the screen so I zoom back to fit. Then i shift the image down to meet the screen bottom and only have a blank at the top,which i prefer

Yes/ no?

Thx in advance

The only really issue re any of this is are you selecting an aspect ratio in the sony above normal that forces the panel into a mode where image is lost because the panel is not tall enough to handle it. One can zoom and put image off screen but then zoom to make the image smaller and shift it etc, so one is really changing the screen size to fit the entire image. Using 2.35 and feeding 1.78, you will cut off and lose forever the top and bottom of the fame. not a lot of it but some. what you gain in return is use of all the pixels instead 93% (about) of them. I think as dr. Milller says the image quality might be a little better using the full width. I run my setting at normal zoom and do not use the full panel width. ..But that doesn't make it right or wrong. Its a choice I have 2 college basketball games to watch starting at noon and then 2 NFL playoff games. I'll be watching about 12 hours straight today. I will be relishing the image which makes me feel like I am ewatching the game live but close up.The broadcasts are 1.78 and my aspect ratio on the sony (zoom) will be set to norml and the entire screen will be filled but I will not be lighting 7% of the pixels (3.5% either side) but I will not be losing any part of the image. That's it. Works for me.
post #3867 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

I think its dofferent resolutions. I have a problem with ESPN scrawl. The ESPN signal is 720p 60. The scrawl (text at bottom of screen telling scores, news etc) jumps like judder. No smother flow. Motion control as no effect on it.

I brought this up as a problem I was having with my first unit and asked here if others were experiencing the same thing and those that responded didn't have this issue.

Any reason you can think that some pjs would do this while others don't, Mark?

I used pass through and pj did all the work. The scroll jumped really good is best way to explain it.
post #3868 of 9693
No. its not enough of a problem in my eyes to send it back. i would ask others to check it out on ESPN. I have no clue as it being projector specific. i wonder if it might be FIOS specific to the sony?
post #3869 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovideoholic View Post

I brought this up as a problem I was having with my first unit and asked here if others were experiencing the same thing and those that responded didn't have this issue.

Any reason you can think that some pjs would do this while others don't, Mark?

I used pass through and pj did all the work. The scroll jumped really good is best way to explain it.

I remember this coming up way back when....mine did it initially....I'm pretty sure it was the film mode setting...same thing that was making video games judder....
post #3870 of 9693
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

The only really issue re any of this is are you selecting an aspect ratio in the sony above normal that forces the panel into a mode where image is lost because the panel is not tall enough to handle it. One can zoom and put image off screen but then zoom to make the image smaller and shift it etc, so one is really changing the screen size to fit the entire image. Using 2.35 and feeding 1.78, you will cut off and lose forever the top and bottom of the fame. not a lot of it but some. what you gain in return is use of all the pixels instead 93% (about) of them. I think as dr. Milller says the image quality might be a little better using the full width. I run my setting at normal zoom and do not use the full panel width. ..But that doesn't make it right or wrong. Its a choice I have 2 college basketball games to watch starting at noon and then 2 NFL playoff games. I'll be watching about 12 hours straight today. I will be relishing the image which makes me feel like I am ewatching the game live but close up.The broadcasts are 1.78 and my aspect ratio on the sony (zoom) will be set to norml and the entire screen will be filled but I will not be lighting 7% of the pixels (3.5% either side) but I will not be losing any part of the image. That's it. Works for me.


Another little point ( for the sick testing people like me redface.gif ) if you keep it in normal, and put up a single pixel on/off in 1080P , it can scale it "perfect" and resolve every on/off pixel ( even with or without RC ), that cant be done in 2.35 :1 zoom mode or 1.85:1 mode, both off them make "funny" patterns and do not resolve and show one pixel off then one pixel on - meaning the normal mode will put a sharpere and more defined picture without any overscan ( = not losing any real image information and sharpness - "just" 7 % light ). On the other hand, if someone needs every lumen/ ft-L they can find, they should probely use 2.35/1.85:1 mode like wolfgang M. did, because off his very big screen ( not sure he do anymore, because now he use a A-lens !?)

I prefer the normal mode to and in 2D most people will have "enought" ( exists the scenario at all wink.gifbiggrin.gif ) light anyway, unless they have very big screens ( over 4 -5 m wide ) or/and ekstreme low gain´s ?

Pick your poison smile.gif

dj
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home