or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony VPL-vw1000 - Page 214

post #6391 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

I think it's always been clear--thought not highly publicized--that 4K is only really going to meaningful for projector setups, and even those with relatively large screens and close viewing distances. For persons sitting at ~ 1.0 screen widths it will be a real advance, but this is admittedly a small minority of the general public. Since I'm in this category, though, i'm very excited by it.

Definitely. The jump in panel resolution does not mean there will always be the same jump in source quality. With most films the extra detail past 1080p simply isn't there. Unfortunately not everything has been shot on the best equipment and older film stock degrades. The jump from Blu-ray to the next UHD format will be no where near as stark compared to the jump from DVD to blu-ray.
post #6392 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

I think it's always been clear--thought not highly publicized--that 4K is only really going to meaningful for projector setups, and even those with relatively large screens and close viewing distances. For persons sitting at ~ 1.0 screen widths it will be a real advance, but this is admittedly a small minority of the general public. Since I'm in this category, though, i'm very excited by it.

HT with big screens such as you have and viewing distances as close as you view from, I'm guessing would be less than .0001% of the market, perhaps less. I'm a 1.9 to 1.5 screen widths away with 1080p and depending on the source at times I find the image quality lacking...still, I too am looking forward to UHD with good sources, shot on 4K or higher.
post #6393 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highjinx View Post

HT with big screens such as you have and viewing distances as close as you view from, I'm guessing would be less than .0001% of the market, perhaps less. I'm a 1.9 to 1.5 screen widths away with 1080p and depending on the source at times I find the image quality lacking...still, I too am looking forward to UHD with good sources, shot on 4K or higher.

Good point. I didn't mean to imply that one only sees benefit of 4K when viewing from 1.0 SW, only that this was a clear cut case where one would. I certainly believe that one can see improvement from the distances you note, esp with eyes younger than mine.
post #6394 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Withrow View Post

Understood, but if 3d is not a big deal, the Sony is much much brighter than the RS20. My point was that he should try them both. He may be surprised at ge simple solution.

Ben, didn't you go from the RS20 to the VW1000?
Reply
Reply
post #6395 of 9623
Quote:
I've been playing around with the FMP-X1 server for a few weeks because I purchased a 65" Sony X9 for my bedroom. I hate to say it, but I just sent the server back for a return.

In short, the quality wasn't great. Most of the 4K movies looked no different than their Blu-Ray counterparts (believe it or not, some looked worse), with the exception of Amazing Spiderman, which looked only marginally better on scenes with a lot of texture (i.e., Spidey's suit). Some of the shorts also looked decent, but not so mind-blowingly good that it would make a $500 server worth it.

Luckily, I had two X9s running side-by-side, as I also purchased a set for my parents, and was "testing" it before dropping it off at their place. On one set, I played the 4K movies on the X1, and on the other, I played a "Mastered in 4K" equivalent Blu-Ray. I asked a few people which they thought was 4K, and most couldn't tell. When you take a $35 digital download and stack it up against a $15-20 Blu-Ray with remarkably similar results, it's a hard sell. If the industry really wants 4K to take off, it'll have to do much better than what's on the X1...

As a self-confessed "videophile," I'd stick with Blu-Ray 99% of the time, if given an option, which says a lot. I'd hate to see what the "average" consumer would think.

They've also been very, very slow to add new movies to the service. As of last week, the only new release movies have been the new Evil Dead and After Earth. Evil Dead didn't look good at all, and After Earth was a crappy movie, so I didn't bother.

Another major drawback, as I mentioned above, was price. New releases are now $35 to buy, which seems to have gone up from the $30 they started with. TV episodes are a good deal though, and the first episode of Breaking Bad seemed a little sharper than my Blu-Rays, but again, not enough to warrant a full-season purchase.

The one good thing about the X1 was that it was very easy to setup. I had read horror stories about the player not working, even after the TV update, but it was smooth sailing for me. The download times weren't bad either.

Hopefully the service will come to the PS4. If it does, I might buy the occasional movie or TV show. But right now, I don't even think it's worth using an HDMI port. Oh well. Hopefully the service will improve with time.

Thanks for that report Brian. My feeling is that it will take quite some time for 4K content to sort itself out. That said, if I was in the market to buy a new projector, I have already noted in my own theater that just the increased pixel density of 4K would let me sit a bit closer and no doubt have a better picture with Blu Rays overall. So enjoy a better picture with Blu Ray / 1080p sources while you wait for 4K content. You have nothing to lose in the mean time ! smile.gif
post #6396 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

Thanks for that report Brian. My feeling is that it will take quite some time for 4K content to sort itself out. That said, if I was in the market to buy a new projector, I have already noted in my own theater that just the increased pixel density of 4K would let me sit a bit closer and no doubt have a better picture with Blu Rays overall. So enjoy a better picture with Blu Ray / 1080p sources while you wait for 4K content. You have nothing to lose in the mean time ! smile.gif

Brian already owns the VW1000ES, he just could not try the server on his front projector. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #6397 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

Ben, didn't you go from the RS20 to the VW1000?

G70 -> RS1 -> 1000. I've seen the RS20 several times though.
post #6398 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianMundt View Post

I've been playing around with the FMP-X1 server for a few weeks because I purchased a 65" Sony X9 for my bedroom. I hate to say it, but I just sent the server back for a return.

In short, the quality wasn't great. Most of the 4K movies looked no different than their Blu-Ray counterparts (believe it or not, some looked worse), with the exception of Amazing Spiderman, which looked only marginally better on scenes with a lot of texture (i.e., Spidey's suit). Some of the shorts also looked decent, but not so mind-blowingly good that it would make a $500 server worth it.

Luckily, I had two X9s running side-by-side, as I also purchased a set for my parents, and was "testing" it before dropping it off at their place. On one set, I played the 4K movies on the X1, and on the other, I played a "Mastered in 4K" equivalent Blu-Ray. I asked a few people which they thought was 4K, and most couldn't tell. When you take a $35 digital download and stack it up against a $15-20 Blu-Ray with remarkably similar results, it's a hard sell. If the industry really wants 4K to take off, it'll have to do much better than what's on the X1...

As a self-confessed "videophile," I'd stick with Blu-Ray 99% of the time, if given an option, which says a lot. I'd hate to see what the "average" consumer would think.

They've also been very, very slow to add new movies to the service. As of last week, the only new release movies have been the new Evil Dead and After Earth. Evil Dead didn't look good at all, and After Earth was a crappy movie, so I didn't bother.

Another major drawback, as I mentioned above, was price. New releases are now $35 to buy, which seems to have gone up from the $30 they started with. TV episodes are a good deal though, and the first episode of Breaking Bad seemed a little sharper than my Blu-Rays, but again, not enough to warrant a full-season purchase.

The one good thing about the X1 was that it was very easy to setup. I had read horror stories about the player not working, even after the TV update, but it was smooth sailing for me. The download times weren't bad either.

Hopefully the service will come to the PS4. If it does, I might buy the occasional movie or TV show. But right now, I don't even think it's worth using an HDMI port. Oh well. Hopefully the service will improve with time.

You missed out on the best movie on the FMP-X1. Check out the preview or buy the Life Cycle movie. It is literally the best 4k movie that I have seen. The visuals are extremely impressive. i show this movie to everyone that comes to my house and it always blows them away.
post #6399 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Withrow View Post

G70 -> RS1 -> 1000. I've seen the RS20 several times though.

I remembered that you went from a JVC to the 1000, just could not remember which one.
The B-stocks are coming to an end soon. We are down to two available.
Reply
Reply
post #6400 of 9623
Joe Kane has an article in Widescreen Review that echoes a lot of Mark and others' complaints about HDMI 2.0. The biggest thing I got out of it that I didn't understand before is HDMI 2.0 doesn't even match current DisplayPort. Ridiculous.
Quote:
So I'm back to saying that if the 2160p set doesn't have a DisplayPort connection, don't buy it.
post #6401 of 9623
I don't think holding out for display port gains you anything, even if it turns out to be a better solution. Betamax was better than VHS. Look how that ended.
Reply
Reply
post #6402 of 9623
Well with Display Port or a Dual DVI-D port, gamers should theoretically be able to do 1920x1080 @ 60hz in 3D. Though who uses a $20,000+ projector for gaming?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Peer View Post

So enjoy a better picture with Blu Ray / 1080p sources while you wait for 4K content. You have nothing to lose in the mean time ! smile.gif

Then where did my wallet go?
(only kidding)
Edited by coderguy - 10/20/13 at 9:17am
post #6403 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by coderguy View Post

Though who uses a $20,000+ projector for gaming?

Lots of people.
post #6404 of 9623
I am not complaining. One complains when there is a chance that the thing complained about will be changed or fixed. This steak is well done, I ordered medium rare. Sorry we will bring you another one cooked properly.

Bitching is what I am doing because we can't get them to change it. We are stuck with it and these are the negative ramifications. This is the time for serious therapeutic bitching. smile.gif
post #6405 of 9623
Question for you guys on anamorphic stretching / upconversion with the 1000ES....

Suppose I feed the projector 1080p, and tell the projector I've got a 1.32:1 anamorphic lens (for whatever reason, this is apparently the ratio in the projector settings, even though the lens is actually 1.33:1, as far as I know). Since the projector apparently can't do anamorphic stretching on a 4K image, it must do the anamorphic stretch first, then upscale to 4096x2160.

Now, since I've told it that I've got a 1:32.1 lens, does this also imply that the final image (not including black bars) after upscaling will be 3840x2160 rather than 4096x2160? And then if this is the case, in order to fit the image onto the native resolution, does it fill in black bars on the sides of the image?
post #6406 of 9623
No, when it does a v-stretch, it doesn't mask out the top and bottom areas with black bars. It just does a vertical stretch.
post #6407 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by aligborat View Post

Question for you guys on anamorphic stretching / upconversion with the 1000ES....

Suppose I feed the projector 1080p, and tell the projector I've got a 1.32:1 anamorphic lens (for whatever reason, this is apparently the ratio in the projector settings, even though the lens is actually 1.33:1, as far as I know). Since the projector apparently can't do anamorphic stretching on a 4K image, it must do the anamorphic stretch first, then upscale to 4096x2160.

Now, since I've told it that I've got a 1:32.1 lens, does this also imply that the final image (not including black bars) after upscaling will be 3840x2160 rather than 4096x2160? And then if this is the case, in order to fit the image onto the native resolution, does it fill in black bars on the sides of the image?

The numbers are rounded, remembering the actual panel 1.8888 etc (4096/2160) and 1.7777 etc (3840/2160). When you go into the set up menu and select the a lens setting as 1.32 or 1.24, this has no effect, there is no off selection. It looks to this toggle setting when you switch aspect from say normal to v stretch. Then it looks to the A lens setting you chose. If you chose 1.32, it will light up the panel as a 3840 width leaving black bars on the sides.. If you selected 1.24, it will light up the full panel width of 4096.
Edited by mark haflich - 10/21/13 at 7:04am
post #6408 of 9623
Can you guys also see the iris pumping from time to time? I did not see this on my VPL-HW50ES.

And what does the FILM PROJECTION option actually do? My picture gets dimmer but a have a slight feeling that I get better motion.
post #6409 of 9623
I've seen the iris "pump" on only one film so far - Zero Dark Thirty - during the Bin Laden compound attack sequences the APL of the scenes seems to be right around the iris fade to black threshold and it was continually changing between blackout and image. In the end I turned off the iris for the duration of the film. First and only time I've seen that.
post #6410 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

The start date is in November. Sony asked us to submit them this week, so it is getting closer. smile.gif


Mike

Have to ask redface.gif, do you have any info about the upgrade for us people in Europe ? ( primesupport here didnt have a clue about it frown.gif )


dj
post #6411 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_H View Post

I've seen the iris "pump" on only one film so far - Zero Dark Thirty - during the Bin Laden compound attack sequences the APL of the scenes seems to be right around the iris fade to black threshold and it was continually changing between blackout and image. In the end I turned off the iris for the duration of the film. First and only time I've seen that.
ok, thanks. And what does the option FILM PROJECTION exactly do?

Also, I m going to build a HTPC which will output 4K. At what resolution do I have to output the video cards resolution to the VW1000 to correpond with the native resolution of the VW1000?
post #6412 of 9623
Film Projection is black frame insertion? Used to improve motion but I don't personally use it due to light loss and motion is already decent.
post #6413 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_H View Post

Film Projection is black frame insertion? Used to improve motion but I don't personally use it due to light loss and motion is already decent.
I just tested FILM PROJECTION + FI LOW setting. This looks pretty good to me.
post #6414 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_H View Post

Film Projection is black frame insertion? Used to improve motion but I don't personally use it due to light loss and motion is already decent.





+1

And agree - Film Projection is black frame insertion

dj
post #6415 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanderdvd View Post

ok, thanks. And what does the option FILM PROJECTION exactly do?

Also, I m going to build a HTPC which will output 4K. At what resolution do I have to output the video cards resolution to the VW1000 to correpond with the native resolution of the VW1000?



4096x2160 at 24 frames
post #6416 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by d.j. View Post

4096x2160 at 24 frames
Just thought some more about it 2x 1080p = 3840x2160 so why not output that resolution with my HTPC?
post #6417 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

If you chose 1.32, it will light up the panel as a 3840 width leaving black bars on the sides.. If you selected 1.24, it will light up the full panel width of 4096.

Great, this is what I was trying to figure out. Thanks Mark.

As an interesting aside though, it seems to me that the 1.25 a-lens most likely makes things a lot harder on the projector and probably makes the image quality worse due to extra steps in digitally scaling / stretching / mangling the image. Here's my thought:

You start with a 2.35:1 image in 1920x1080 pixels. That 2.35 image actually lights up about 817 pixels vertically, leaving the infamous top/bottom black bars in the remaining 263 vertical pixels. Then, you do the vertical stretch by 1.33:1, eliminating the black pixels and leaving yourself with a 1920x1080 image that's stretched vertically. The projector then upscales this to 3840x2160, which is precisely a 2-to-1 increase in the number of pixels in each dimension. In theory, 1/4 of the information can be preserved exactly, while the remaining 3/4 gets "filled in" by the upconversion. Per your post, black bars get filled in on left/right to get this image onto the full panel width.

Contrast this with the 1.25 scenario. Your initial lit-up image of 1920x817 gets scaled up by 1.25. I don't know exactly how it does this, but it probably either (a) stretches only vertically, leaving you with an image that's roughly 1920x1021, which then gets upconverted by a rather funky ratio of about 2.12:1, or (b) it stretches vertically by the requested 1.25:1 ratio, then in effect does a 6-percent "digital zoom" to take the image from 1920x1021 out to 2048x1080, then upscales by a 2:1 ratio. Either way, there's additional (and probably somewhat awkward) digital monkeying that has to happen in this case compared to the 1.33:1 case. I'd think that in general this leads to an inferior image.

This is to say nothing of the quality of the glass comprising the 1.33 vs. 1.25 lens. It's just to say that there's most likely a non-trivial additional step in the digital processing in the 1.25 case compared to the 1.33 that results in poorer performance in the 1.25:1 case.
post #6418 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanderdvd View Post

Just thought some more about it 2x 1080p = 3840x2160 so why not output that resolution with my HTPC?
If your card can do it, that's fine for 4k content. For 2k content, it depends on whether you want PC scaling or the vw1000's RC scaling (which is particularly good). For 2k content, the vw1000's scaling is also quite flexible, so you don't need to use a PC to get around any feature limitations. Built-in 4k scaling options are much more limited.
post #6419 of 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbas View Post

You missed out on the best movie on the FMP-X1. Check out the preview or buy the Life Cycle movie. It is literally the best 4k movie that I have seen. The visuals are extremely impressive. i show this movie to everyone that comes to my house and it always blows them away.

I did see Life Cycle-- forgot to mention that one. I agree with you that it looked great.
post #6420 of 9623
It's hard to guess the exact digital processing, but from a brightness perspective, 1.25 lenses are ideal, because it uses the full imaging frame. That's for 2k content. For 4k content, you would need external scaling of some sort to use any type of a-lens.

Regarding the importance of precise 2:1 scaling, that depends on the scaling algorithm. It's hard to say. These kinds of subtleties are less important, though, at 4k, since they are near the threshold of what you can see at typical viewing distances.

I haven't witnessed anything too ugly going on.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home