Official JVC X30 / RS45 owner's thread! - Page 62

Hi Zombie10k or whoever is in the know,

Being a newbie to 3D, I have just ordered the MV3D kit with RF device and 1 pair of 3d glasses + 1 pair of the Optoma 3D clone of the same. All I need is a blackberry charger to make it work? Can you give me a link to a specific charger you're referring to if I'm not asking too much. I do not have the JVC emitter and do not intend to buy one if not necessary.

Thanks in advance,

Kenobi

Not that I know if, this is a relatively segmented market where each manufacturer's IR devices are usually exclusive to their own projectors.

The Monster Vision RF emitter is an exception of course since it's technically a universal system.



Hi, just your typical, run of the mill USB charger will work well. I have tried several different phone chargers from different companies and they all seem to work. As long as it has the micro-usb connector, you'll be fine.

http://www.amazon.com/BlackBerry-Fac...4498101&sr=8-1

Wait, I don't get it, so we use the JVC Emitter to run the monster glasses??

I want to order the monster glasses, but I'm not sure what you mean. Earlier in some posts it was said to run both emitters at the same time, then it was said only the JVC emitter works on the JVC projector?

I thought I was being clear, sorry about that. let's re-clarify:

• The JVC emitter is not required to run the MV3D transmitter. It must be plugged directly into projector.
  
  
• The RF transmitter can ONLY be plugged into the projector, it's not possible to slave it from the JVC emitter (even though it ships with an IR receiver). For some reason it doesn't work with the JVC, but it works fine with the Sony's IR system.
  
  
• The RF transmitter requires a power supply, the average micro-usb phone charger works fine.
  
  
• If you want to run both the JVC / Xpand IR glasses and MV3D's, you need a 3 pin splitter.

Another way to put it:

If you want only Monster glasses
Buy the monster kit and glasses. You don't need to buy a JVC emitter.

If you want to run BOTH Monster and JVC glasses
You make the splice in Zombie's post.

Where and how to purchase this kit?
Sorry for the noobie question...

Lol, no need to apologize. I just asked this question in the 3D Tech forum like 4 hours ago!

AVS is a dealer. You can buy them here. Just contact Mike, Mark, or whoever you may have worked with in the past. You can find their contact info in the signature of their posts (which are all over this forum).

I just bought these today (MonsterVisoion 3D kit and Optoma 3D glasses):

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...00_i01_details


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...00_i00_details

Regards,

Kenobi

Well,
I just placed the exact same order...thanks


Also thanks to Steve for his reply.

Where should the JVC emitter be placed? I know in the manual it says on top of the projector but this poses a problem for me. My projector is mounted above second row seating. If you sit in the second row the glasses lose sync constantly. Would I be better off mounting the emitter on the back wall off to the side so there is a clear path to the emitter for everyone?

Got my RS45 up and running, dang near perfect convergence... I didnt know convergence could really be this spot on. My only issue is i have the unit sitting near the ceiling in a custom cabinet. The cabinet is level as I did built it myself and checked everything. I am unfortunately 3-4 feet above the center of the screen in the vertical direction. I tilted the project forward a bit by using the 2 rear screen out feet. I then shifted the lens down until I was center on the screen in the vertical direction. I played with several.... several variations in the vertical lens shift and the amount I have the rear feet raised and I simply cannot get the image completely square..... I am not going to use the keystone as that would not be good for the image quality... but for the life of me I cant get the image square

Well crap. I just powered up my RS-45 and it will not show a picture. It shows no input no matter what I hook up to any of the inputs. I took a PS3, plugged an HDMI in to it and connected that to a computer monitor. I was able to see all signals, but the RS-45 saw nothing. I took an Xbox360, hooked it up via Component to a monitor and another TV and saw signal, but when hooked up to the RS-45 the projector said No Input.

Any ideas anyone? I REALLY do not want to have to return this thing as it is just GORGEOUS.

[*]The RF transmitter requires a power supply, the average micro-usb phone charger works fine.

Actually you don't on the RS45. My monster RF transmitter is plugged into the sync port and is receiving its power from it. You only need to provide power to the emitter via the micro usb port if the sync port is not powered. You may have needed to since you are powering two different emitters, but by default you do not.

So the projector is projecting an image but it's not accepting the input directly from the PS3? I hate to ask the obvious but you are selecting the input that the PS3 is plugged into on the projector right? Did you try another HDMI input on the projector?

Did you accidently push the Hide button on the remote? It will only display a black screen if this is pushed. Also you won't get an image while the projector is powering up which takes a couple of minutes.

Hehe, yes, I have tried all the different inputs, I have waited for it to power up. The Blue screen is showing and I can navigate all the menus on the projector, but it will not accept input on any of the inputs. I have tried both HDMI and the Component using multiple cables and 2 different PS3's (The were hooked up to TV's and verified to work before hooking up to the projector) and an Xbox360.

Not sure, I am going to leave the PJ unplugged for the night and see if it just got all horfed up somehow. Otherwise I will be calling tomorrow to see what to do.

If you haven't already tried going through the display setup on the ps3, you might give it a whirl.

Swapping HDMI cables?

With my previous RS40, I usually powered up the projector 1st, then my preamp/processor, and the Ps3 last. You might try that -- or cycling the power on your video source (ps3), while the projector is on and connected.

I am missing something here. Where do I select the framepacked mode on the player? There are 3 options in the Menu (Full HD, Checker board, and Side by Side). I chose Side by Side. The Xpands didn't sync to the emitter with Full HD (which my assumption was that is 2D only) and Checker board. Auto on the JVC didn't work either until I selected Side by Side. I probably am doing something wrong and if you know a quick answer please share.

Yup, tried all that. Multiple cables, multiple sources, powering on in different orders, powering off an powering on the source. I have a pretty extensive list of troubleshooting steps that I go through with something like this before I post on a forum, especially with a device that has been working for me for 20 hours. It is very strange, I am honestly at a loss as to what it could be.

All I know at this point is that if I take an HDMI cable from my PS3 to my computer monitor I get the dashboard screen. If I then unhook and hook up to the projector I get nothing. I can power off and power on the PS3 and get nothing, then simply swap the HDMI cable to the computer monitor and I get the dashboard. The monitor is coming up in 1080P resolution as well, so it is not a weird unsupported resolution.

Not to mention the other PS3 and the Xbox that I have tried. I suppose I could do a factory reset on the RS45 and see if it picks up after that?

You have too keep the projector leveled, if you tilt it, then keystone is required. If the lensshift is'nt enough then lower it or raise the screen.
Merry christmas from sweden!

/karra

Hooked up my new RS45 I received today and so far I'm pleased so far but only watched one movie. Right out of the box I turned the aperture all the way down and selected the D gamma and ran the Bluray version of Rise of the Planet of the Apes... it was very good, my wife and daughter said it was great (this without any calibration or even tweaked gamma/brightness settings). Even with the aperture all the way down and brightness set to -10 it is too bright for my bat cave (138" diagonal screen, 15ft throw, Carada cinema screen). It is a light cannon compared to anything I've had or even seen before - it is really bright. With everything turned way down I'm still reading 16.7 lumens... basically still a bit bright. The sharpness is good, black levels are about perfect, and my wife even commented on the colors (and how good they were). The computer desktop looks great too.

My impressions after one movie is excellent...

You want the "Full HD" mode on the player. What mode number do you have the XpanDs in?

The Xpand 104s didn't sync in audo mode so when I went through the manual setup they were detected at 5. Is this what you are referring to?

Video sourced from a camera, film or video has an MTF of about 10% or less at spatial frequencies equal to the pixel grid of 1920x1080, thats about as unsharp as you can get and still see anything. This pixel level softness is intentional and required for a clean alias free image that does not look “digital”. Ideally pixels should have soft edges that blend into the adjoining pixels to keep the pixel grid as invisible as possible.
Cleanly defined sharp edged pixels represent a distortion that is not in the original video image we are attempting to recreate as faithfully as possible. JVC realise this and offer a sudo 4k system that blurs at the pixel level yet does not make a video image less sharp as MTF at the spatial frequencies of interest is not reduced.
I use a double scaling system to brake 1:1 mapping, this softens at the pixel level and gives PC text soft edges but sharpens (increases MTF) at lower spatial frequencies important for image sharpness with video.



PC generated test patterns and text have inherently 100% MTF at the pixel level and are therefore totally unlike video. The sharp edged pixels of single chip DLP will make PC text look sharper, however tests have shown that DLP and JVC's LCoS have the same MTF performance which means the sharpness of video should be the same all else being equal. Those sharp pixels edges that make single chip DLP look sharper with PC text are detrimental to video image quality as they represent a distortion that should not be visible in video. Some may like this distortion as it gives the illusion of greater sharpness, but it is a distortion non the less. The only thing that is pixel level sharp in video are the edges of compression artefacts and most of us don’t what them accentuated.

Imperfect convergence and CA are also not an issue unless the viewer can see color fringing at their viewing distance. All flat panels are mis converged by design as the red, green and blue sub pixels are laid out next to each other. Flat panels also have terrible fill factor that varies depending on the color being displayed.

I'm not sure who made this standard or came up with this theory that you cannot see true DLP sharpness in the video and anything else is just distortion, or that the effects of convergence cannot be seen in video (it is mild but it can be seen). To be clear, I'm not arguing against the JVC at all, I own the JVC, I'm really just trying to keep the debate fair between DLP vs. LCOS, neither one is a winner in all categories IMHO.

The JVC is very sharp, but DLP's sharpness is not what I would call unnatural. It's like saying an LCD monitor that has basically perfect pixel sharpness is adding a bunch of distortion to all video and will look bad. Just because you can see flaws that are there in the source does not mean a "cleaner pixel" or even a slightly sharpness enhanced representation is adding more distortion than the benefits received from doing so give. It's really the source content's job to produce the pixels properly for a given scenario.

No device is good enough yet to really be talking about a purely natural image, it's all processed in some manner and fake representations of the source, if they weren't it'd look bad. Even if it weren't processed, we're dealing with technologies blending light together in different manners, so we're not like looking out a window into real life yet, once that day comes then it'll be another argument I suppose. Although I will say that this stuff has gotten so good, that many times video looks better than real life (more contrasty usually). Still though, even if you turn off every single enhancement control on the projector, the image is still heavily processed even in the sense of just the way the light of the projector works. All that really matters is the end result, what our eyes tell us.

MTF or any other thing can be thrown around as a reason, but I know what my eyes are telling me and in general it's the same thing reviewers often also see (DLP a little punchier occasionally - but not always, LCD looks a bit edgier or not as film like, and LCOS is very smooth and consistent with darker blacks). Whether or not the DLP look is more fake, to me not enough to point a finger at it, so I don't think so, I don't see anything FAKE looking about the DLP's I've seen when it comes to their sharpness, not unless I crank it up too much.

The film-like look of DLP vs. LCOS is pretty close, the LCOS edges it out for a slightly more natural looking image, but it's not what I'd say is the more important difference between the two, but I guess some see it that way. I find in many scenes DLP and LCOS look too close to really even make a call between the two, especially in good camera work. I only usually prefer DLP in brighter scenes where the camera work isn't as good, whatever the reason.

I prefer to watch the DLP for some things still, but it's often a toss-up. I still would generally pick the JVC over every DLP that is available today, but I like having a DLP as well (I enjoy both the nuances of the two techs). That said, if a DLP could do the same contrast as the JVC and have no RBE, I'd most likely take the DLP over the JVC. That device however does not exist, and I do agree that the added native contrast of the JVC is at times more important than the DLP POP that is often varying anyhow, and that the JVC is especially good for movies.

The JVC does a lot of things very well and some things better than almost every other projector under $4k, but it doesn't always do everything better than everything else.

If you really do mean the Brightness control then that is not the correct control to do what you want. As I have said before, whoever decided to call the black level adjustment Brightness and the white level adjustment Contrast should have been flogged because they caused a ton of confusion. I would suggest first making sure that the lamp is on Normal along with the iris being shut down and start with Brightness at 0 if using Standard HDMI mode. Then pick a custom gamma of 2.4, but go adjust the 5% level for white up to about 45. If the images are a little too bright like that then you could lower the Contrast setting (the one that has the most effect on how bright the images are) a little bit. If the images are way too bright then a neutral density filter or darker screen are generally better options than lowering the Contrast setting a lot because that hurts the total range (on/off CR).

I should mention that the above for gamma is just a first pass I have done, but haven't measured. So those settings are just a suggestion and if somebody has measured or spent more time and come up with better settings then those would be a better place to start.

--Darin

Also just to add to my previous rant, I used to be a non-believer in dark scene POP on projectors, I guess because I didn't see enough content in the right conditions on a JVC or on a projector with such a high native contrast to make the determination.

I am now a believer, it was like a whole entirely new experience to watch a Harry Potter movie on the JVC (and I'm so sick of Harry Potter, I can barely sit through it, but on the JVC the contrast was incredible).

I've watched it on a Plasma before, I think Plasma's look way too digital IMHO, if we were arguing the Plasma or LCD TV look vs. LCOS projectors, then I'd certainly say that TV's are too digital. However, when arguing the DLP vs. LCOS look for film, I don't think there is enough difference to really call one all that more digital looking, a tiny tiny bit, but it's not like the difference between an LCD TV and a LCOS projector (which is like super-digital vs. not digital looking at all).

You have probably reversed the end piece to lengthen the legs instead of raising and lowering the projector as intended by manufacturer.