or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Video Processors › Darbee vision darblet
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Darbee vision darblet - Page 59

post #1741 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

So no ones Darblets green on/ off light continually flashes? Hmm, this doesn't sound promising.

Is it like explained on post #1733 wabo?
post #1742 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post

Thoughts about POP Mode
I did a little more playing last night. As it turns out my various modes POP, HD, GAMING etc are working. I think the still frame I tested with previously just happened to be one where the differences were not easily noticed.
Anyway, as it turns out, I think POP can do a very good job. I had gone into my Darbee experience thinking POP mode it was not for serious viewing because it would be blown out etc. However I find that the picture is even cleaner/more focused-looking compared to HD mode. I was doing my testing around 43%. With Darbee off = bleh. With Darbee on HD 43% = very nice. With Darbee on POP 43% even better! It also makes the picture more dynamic. As I mentioned earlier, it also has a lot of similar characteristics to the adaptive gamma setting on the Radiance. It brightens certain areas and darkens others, effectively giving you a digital dynamic iris of sorts. However with the Lumagen value for this it is applied in such a way where you get an overly dark picture at times and some black crush. Whereas the Darbee in POP mode has a much better approach/algorithm which seems to give these same benefits but without the downsides.
I was torn a little bit, however, in using this mode because it does darken the picture a little and take the vibrancy out of some of the highlights. Yes I really liked how it not only gives extra dimenions to the picture but "cleans it up" Darbee style that much better. For now I settled on using GAME mode which seems to apply a little of this logic compared to HD mode, but far less than POP mode.
I would love to hear more about the opinions of others on POP mode, when/how often they use it and whether they share similar opinions on how it works for them.
Dr. Darbee and company - It would be great if you added another control where we could control the other variable(s) used that sets HD, GAME, and POP mode a part. For instance I would like to do something in between HD mode and POP mode. Someone earlier in the thread suggested that GAME mode was half way between HD and POP but IMO it is only a tiny bit different than HD mode. So imagine a slider or parameter of some kind that you could use to move the affect anywhere in between HD mode and GAME mode to taste. That would be amazing!

Not for me! The HD mode does a better job flushing out fine details in the background. Like the floating mountains and greenery in Avatar. The pop mode ruins that detail the last time I tried it.
post #1743 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post

Thoughts about POP Mode
I did a little more playing last night. As it turns out my various modes POP, HD, GAMING etc are working. I think the still frame I tested with previously just happened to be one where the differences were not easily noticed.
Anyway, as it turns out, I think POP can do a very good job. I had gone into my Darbee experience thinking POP mode it was not for serious viewing because it would be blown out etc. However I find that the picture is even cleaner/more focused-looking compared to HD mode. I was doing my testing around 43%. With Darbee off = bleh. With Darbee on HD 43% = very nice. With Darbee on POP 43% even better! It also makes the picture more dynamic. As I mentioned earlier, it also has a lot of similar characteristics to the adaptive gamma setting on the Radiance. It brightens certain areas and darkens others, effectively giving you a digital dynamic iris of sorts. However with the Lumagen value for this it is applied in such a way where you get an overly dark picture at times and some black crush. Whereas the Darbee in POP mode has a much better approach/algorithm which seems to give these same benefits but without the downsides.
I was torn a little bit, however, in using this mode because it does darken the picture a little and take the vibrancy out of some of the highlights. Yes I really liked how it not only gives extra dimenions to the picture but "cleans it up" Darbee style that much better. For now I settled on using GAME mode which seems to apply a little of this logic compared to HD mode, but far less than POP mode.
I would love to hear more about the opinions of others on POP mode, when/how often they use it and whether they share similar opinions on how it works for them.
Dr. Darbee and company - It would be great if you added another control where we could control the other variable(s) used that sets HD, GAME, and POP mode a part. For instance I would like to do something in between HD mode and POP mode. Someone earlier in the thread suggested that GAME mode was half way between HD and POP but IMO it is only a tiny bit different than HD mode. So imagine a slider or parameter of some kind that you could use to move the affect anywhere in between HD mode and GAME mode to taste. That would be amazing!

This may not apply but I have used 2 darblets in series -one at HD 50% and the second at Pop at 10% - different combinations yield different results but it is like a double enchancement without any artifacts - I rather like it -anyone else with 2 darblets tried this doubling effect?

post #1744 of 7870
As posted above the green LED pulses 1/second to indicate all is in order
post #1745 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmassie View Post

This may not apply but I have used 2 darblets in series -one at HD 50% and the second at Pop at 10% - different combinations yield different results but it is like a double enchancement without any artifacts - I rather like it -anyone else with 2 darblets tried this doubling effect?

wmassie

Looks like you may be the first to Frankendarbee this technology. biggrin.gif

Carry on.
post #1746 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

Is it like explained on post #1733 wabo?

I guess so, Franin. I just find it bizarre it continually blinks instead of simply staying green.
post #1747 of 7870
Please no use of the "troll" labels etc. Pic and those quoting pic had their posts deleted.
post #1748 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pain Infliction View Post

Do any of you guys leave the Darbee on all the time?

As I understand it, though the power supply can handle more this device is using 1 amp. And since turning electronics off and on repeatedly will shorten its life, it seems that this device should not be disconnected or otherwise powered off.
post #1749 of 7870
Having fun playing around with it. One question, is the green on/off light supposed to flash constantly?

I think the internal Green LED flashes when the microcontroller is working. I don't see it when my video system is off.

Suggest you pull down the online User Guide here: http://darbeevision.com/assets/documents/DarbeeVision%20Darblet%20User%20Guide%2020120426a.pdf
post #1750 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

Hi and I suppose 'Away the Lads'.
Been on this forum for some time now mostly on the Duo calibration threads.
You are right, I do seem to be getting the 'back up' of the traditionalists.
My crusade is to get Stuart and Phil to accept progress.
The Darbee may or may not be perfect in what it is trying to achieve but at least somebody has the vision to try something different.and there appears to be a market for it.
Once people get used to having one 'effect' I am certain there will be others.
I love to calibrate (as an amateur of course) and see no problem in having my PQ as close to standards as I can get it for brightness, contrast, gamma and all 6 colours then trying out different 'effects' to possibly further enhance my viewing experience.
I can see a BD in all its glory through my Oppo and Duo to my Display but maybe with an effects package this can be delivered to me in a different way without losing too much original accuracy?
Apologies if you are just 'winding up' the thread.

I am not winding up the thread as you put it and i am certainly not saying don't use it or buy it. But i really do believe it should only be used with certain material of say a lower quality, which i have said from the beginning. Some seem to be advocating having it on all the time, well that 's up to them but nothing to do with image fidelity or accuracy. Some detail was never ment to be seen that is basically why you can't see it, but mind you you can get the same effect by upping contrast or brightness (give it a go gents).
Traditionalists you say, i say they understand the basic fundamentals of image fidelity.smile.gif
post #1751 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post

but mind you you can get the same effect by upping contrast or brightness (give it a go gents).

Really? You think so? The bigger question is.....How do you know?
post #1752 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post

I am not winding up the thread as you put it and i am certainly not saying don't use it or buy it. But i really do believe it should only be used with certain material of say a lower quality, which i have said from the beginning. Some seem to be advocating having it on all the time, well that 's up to them but nothing to do with image fidelity or accuracy. Some detail was never ment to be seen that is basically why you can't see it, but mind you you can get the same effect by upping contrast or brightness (give it a go gents).
Traditionalists you say, i say they understand the basic fundamentals of image fidelity.smile.gif

Based on what????? YOU admitted and to this day still have not seen it with highest quality material. You continually ignore everything that actual users report to the exact opposite. Some 2 months in now. Sight unseen from you this becomes insulting at a point. All you do is rush in here breathlessly with any negative comment you can find such as yesterday from the guy who was feeding an admittedly not great signal full of artifacts in his first limited viewing of it. Yet you ignore ALL other expert opinion. No one on the plus side with it is good enough. Gary Reber, Josh Zyber, sounds like Kris Deering from his first limited comments, and certainly the large number of posters here......many of whom happen to be every bit as attentive to IQ and calibration that you go on and on and on about. NONE of that is good enough??? Do you have a reading comprehension problem or is there seriously an agenda with you? Highest quality material NOT low quality material is where the processing has its best chance to shine and accomplish what it was originally set about to do.
post #1753 of 7870
Surprised that nobody has mentioned this news piece from the DarbeeVision site, especially in reference to existing DVn use in the film industry, and the comments from directors like Robert Altman and other techs in the imaging business:

http://darbeevision.com/view_news/id/1/title/DarbeeVision___A_Pioneering_Technology_Giving_All_Digital_Image_Media_Amazing_Clarity_and_Depth

So far I really like what I'm seeing. And since I know the eye/brain combo plays its tricks in many ways, it's nice to see that Dr. Darbee has discovered and implemented technology that helps us realize a more realistic experience. Hey, wasn't it over a century ago that someone, probably playing with a flip deck, discovered visual persistence of image, that led to Edison's and others initial film projectors?

As for the "engineers" out there, you know the ones who believe if it can't be measured, it doesn't exist, the aim of "fidelity" is the illusion of reality. Applies to the visual as well as the aural. We've been there and done that for decades with home audio. So, in the video space, I say "Let the games begin, anew".
Edited by sjschaff - 8/5/12 at 10:15am
post #1754 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonF View Post

Based on what????? YOU admitted and to this day still have not seen it with highest quality material. You continually ignore everything that actual users report to the exact opposite. Some 2 months in now. Sight unseen from you this becomes insulting at a point. All you do is rush in here breathlessly with any negative comment you can find such as yesterday from the guy who was feeding an admittedly not great signal full of artifacts in his first limited viewing of it. Yet you ignore ALL other expert opinion. No one on the plus side with it is good enough. Gary Reber, Josh Zyber, sounds like Kris Deering from his first limited comments, and certainly the large number of posters here......many of whom happen to be every bit as attentive to IQ and calibration that you go on and on and on about. NONE of that is good enough??? Do you have a reading comprehension problem or is there seriously an agenda with you? Highest quality material NOT low quality material is where the processing has its best chance to shine and accomplish what it was originally set about to do.

Again Ron you are taking to insults and downright rudeness to anyone who has provided evidence to contradict your line of thinking. We are going to review it when our expert completes his work on his latest movie transfer which is taking up much of his time. I also hope that in the fullness of time that the likes of DNice, Kevin Miller, Joe Kane, David Katzmire, also get to look at this as i regard these guys as the very best in the field of AV tech.
post #1755 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post

I am not winding up the thread as you put it and i am certainly not saying don't use it or buy it. But i really do believe it should only be used with certain material of say a lower quality, which i have said from the beginning. Some seem to be advocating having it on all the time, well that 's up to them but nothing to do with image fidelity or accuracy. Some detail was never ment to be seen that is basically why you can't see it, but mind you you can get the same effect by upping contrast or brightness (give it a go gents).
Traditionalists you say, i say they understand the basic fundamentals of image fidelity.smile.gif

Upping contrast and brightness is NOT the same. Upping brightness cause any grayscale pattern to look way bad, while the Darbee does not change any grayscale pattern... on a real picture, upping brightness cause it to lose the pop factor, while Darbee actually add to the pop factor. So, it is totally not the same.

To me, the Darbee does not add more details to the picture when it is not "supposed to be seen". It merely add more "contrast" to it. Just like LCOS compared to DLP, and you don't tell people that DLP is "too sharp" or "reveal too much details"..
post #1756 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post


Traditionalists you say, i say they understand the basic fundamentals of image fidelity.smile.gif

As you say they understand the basics of 'image fidelity' much better than I will ever do and they perhaps quite rightly claim this as the ultimate 'Holy Grail'.
I don't think the effect is threatening this accolade it is merely presenting the PQ in a different way.

Please let me repeat that I feel calibration and effects can coexist.

Also if it looks better to me then I may prefer to use any effect.
post #1757 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post


 ....  We are going to review it when our expert completes his work on his latest movie transfer which is taking up much of his time.

So the wise thing to do would be to keep your surmises to yourself until you learn something from your own experience.

post #1758 of 7870
Just stumbled upon this thread and device while looking at another thread and am very intrigued by the Darbee! I assume this just passes the audio to what ever device you connect it to, like from the DIRECTV box to the TV..correct? Also I assume if you use this with a receiver for your audio, you would run the HDMI video out from your receiver to the Darbee then out to the display? Has anybody had any sync issues with the audio or handshake issues? I really want to order one, but must make sure that the audio end works well. Thanks for any help you can give me. Oh..how does this unit compare to say the DVDO edge? DUO? Lumigen?
post #1759 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

So the wise thing to do would be to keep your surmises to yourself until you learn something from your own experience.

We meaning HDTVTest as i will not be doing the review.
post #1760 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by PE06MCG View Post

@baslog
I don't see display hardware manufacturers giving us correct calibration out of the box.
So unless we set up our TV /PJ correctly the Director's objective is immediately defeated by an absolutely new Display unit.
Once calibrated this original source may be accurately reproduced.
However, surely the Darbee gives us an 'effect' which is a different thing from 'calibration'.
I do not have a Darbee however I do calibrate but I can see a future for effects and calibration to coexist.
In fact I think other effects could be developed and added to this one, perhaps VP's could have an effects menu as well as a calibration menu?
Anything that improves our viewing experience is surely a good thing and worrying about how Film Directors feel is unneccesary, they should be glad we bought their product in the first place.

The parallel to the progression of audio presentation is nearly perfect.

Mono
Stereo
Surround

Neither reproduces the ambient sound array correctly or completely compared to the biological experience of hearing.
Many technologies have been developed to fill the gaps between imperfect capture and presentation of the audio image.
Audio went to stand alone components to provide the gap fills with high tech solutions developed by small and more nimble companies.
Video is in the process of doing the same.
Light field array capture is now available in a consumer camera (Lytro), yet even with that technology we have to throw away phase information to display it.

It is a wonderful time to be alive.

-DD
post #1761 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franin View Post

bump, would like to know also so when mine comes I don't have to ask the same question.

Green light is the "heart beat" for the FPGA.

It should be flashing continuously, and you can dim it via the menu settings.

From the User Guide that is available on the front page of the website, or here: http://darbeevision.com/assets/documents/DarbeeVision%20Darblet%20User%20Guide%2020120426a.pdf

5. The red LED will light up to indicate that the Darblet is receiving power. An internal green LED will blink once per second to indicate that the Darblet is working.
6. When video is present the Darblet's blue LED will illuminate continuously.

-DD
Edited by DarbeeDr - 8/5/12 at 11:21am
post #1762 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post

Simple solution for many here (though not popular) is to just dump your Lumagen processors. Oh yeah, the Darblet is worth it and does more for the image...
smile.gif

I don't have a Lumagen processor to dump, but I've happily dumped my DVDO Edge after getting a Darblet.
post #1763 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarbeeDr View Post

The parallel to the progression of audio presentation is nearly perfect.
Mono
Stereo
Surround
Neither reproduces the ambient sound array correctly or completely compared to the biological experience of hearing.
Many technologies have been developed to fill the gaps between imperfect capture and presentation of the audio image.
Audio went to stand alone components to provide the gap fills with high tech solutions developed by small and more nimble companies.
Video is in the process of doing the same.
Light field array capture is now available in a consumer camera (Lytro), yet even with that technology we have to throw away phase information to display it.
It is a wonderful time to be alive.
-DD

Larry did you get round to answering any of the questions Alan put to you?smile.gif
post #1764 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post

Thoughts about POP Mode
I did a little more playing last night. As it turns out my various modes POP, HD, GAMING etc are working. I think the still frame I tested with previously just happened to be one where the differences were not easily noticed.
Anyway, as it turns out, I think POP can do a very good job. I had gone into my Darbee experience thinking POP mode it was not for serious viewing because it would be blown out etc. However I find that the picture is even cleaner/more focused-looking compared to HD mode. I was doing my testing around 43%. With Darbee off = bleh. With Darbee on HD 43% = very nice. With Darbee on POP 43% even better! It also makes the picture more dynamic. As I mentioned earlier, it also has a lot of similar characteristics to the adaptive gamma setting on the Radiance. It brightens certain areas and darkens others, effectively giving you a digital dynamic iris of sorts. However with the Lumagen value for this it is applied in such a way where you get an overly dark picture at times and some black crush. Whereas the Darbee in POP mode has a much better approach/algorithm which seems to give these same benefits but without the downsides.
I was torn a little bit, however, in using this mode because it does darken the picture a little and take the vibrancy out of some of the highlights. Yes I really liked how it not only gives extra dimenions to the picture but "cleans it up" Darbee style that much better. For now I settled on using GAME mode which seems to apply a little of this logic compared to HD mode, but far less than POP mode.
I would love to hear more about the opinions of others on POP mode, when/how often they use it and whether they share similar opinions on how it works for them.
Dr. Darbee and company - It would be great if you added another control where we could control the other variable(s) used that sets HD, GAME, and POP mode a part. For instance I would like to do something in between HD mode and POP mode. Someone earlier in the thread suggested that GAME mode was half way between HD and POP but IMO it is only a tiny bit different than HD mode. So imagine a slider or parameter of some kind that you could use to move the affect anywhere in between HD mode and GAME mode to taste. That would be amazing!

Happy to engage discussion.

The entire device is opt in at the end of the chain, at your pleasure.

Full Pop Mode does not restrict the algorithm (in many ways) and allows the presentation of the strongest modifications. Depending upon the content, those modifications may be appreciated or not. For low quality material that has a low signal to noise ratio the modifications that slip through (and might otherwise be offensive in high fidelity images), might go unnoticed. In that case you would appreciate the benefit to the image presentation and not be distracted by the modifications.

In Full Pop Mode, modifications when processing high fidelity material are both more accurately applied and therefore when applied in judicious amounts can create a wonderful level of depth and clarity perception.

Gaming Mode is a brother of Hi Def Mode. Full Pop is the cousin.

In the future, the Modes may have more knobs and dials for the user. It took 9 years to remove them, now everyone wants them back. Fortunately, lashing parameters to hardware is easier to accomplish than being asked to removing them altogether.

-DD
post #1765 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjschaff View Post

Having fun playing around with it. One question, is the green on/off light supposed to flash constantly?
I think the internal Green LED flashes when the microcontroller is working. I don't see it when my video system is off.
Suggest you pull down the online User Guide here: http://darbeevision.com/assets/documents/DarbeeVision%20Darblet%20User%20Guide%2020120426a.pdf

Red LED will flash in response to a signal to the IR sensor and inputs to the physical buttons.

-DD
post #1766 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonF View Post

Based on what????? YOU admitted and to this day still have not seen it with highest quality material. You continually ignore everything that actual users report to the exact opposite. Some 2 months in now. Sight unseen from you this becomes insulting at a point. All you do is rush in here breathlessly with any negative comment you can find such as yesterday from the guy who was feeding an admittedly not great signal full of artifacts in his first limited viewing of it. Yet you ignore ALL other expert opinion. No one on the plus side with it is good enough. Gary Reber, Josh Zyber, sounds like Kris Deering from his first limited comments, and certainly the large number of posters here......many of whom happen to be every bit as attentive to IQ and calibration that you go on and on and on about. NONE of that is good enough??? Do you have a reading comprehension problem or is there seriously an agenda with you? Highest quality material NOT low quality material is where the processing has its best chance to shine and accomplish what it was originally set about to do.

I did not discover the fundamental principle that makes DVP possible, yet 6 years ago I decided to devote my life to help bring this technology to market after seeing a D5 tape of a film transfer (processed with DVP) played out to a studio reference monitor at FotoKem in Los Angeles. I was beyond speechless and look forward to the day when everyone can enjoy what I saw, but in the comfort of their homes. My point is, there are few people in the world that have seen DVP work on real uncompressed material. When you do, you get the ultimate realization that the truth is: the better in , the better out.

-DD
post #1767 of 7870
I thought I grasped how Darbee works, based on pixel-level control of contrast.

I'm scratching my head on what phase might mean; I can't imagine it's the actual waveform phase of GHz (or is it THz) light frequencies.

Could you elaborate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarbeeDr View Post

You cannot argue that our vision biology is meant to process images without phase information.
With conventional image capture, all the phase information of the ambient light array is thrown out.
The defocus and subtract approach with disparate images (phase information) is so simple that it is really a forehead slap.
Simple and really a discovery more than an invention.
The discovery is that you can put 3D phase information into 2D image scenes and yield a gratifying result.
post #1768 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post

Larry did you get round to answering any of the questions Alan put to you?smile.gif

Sorry Larry you must have missed my earlier question?
post #1769 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post

I am not winding up the thread as you put it and i am certainly not saying don't use it or buy it. But i really do believe it should only be used with certain material of say a lower quality, which i have said from the beginning. Some seem to be advocating having it on all the time, well that 's up to them but nothing to do with image fidelity or accuracy. Some detail was never ment to be seen that is basically why you can't see it, but mind you you can get the same effect by upping contrast or brightness (give it a go gents).
Traditionalists you say, i say they understand the basic fundamentals of image fidelity.smile.gif
That statement there exposes that you have no idea what the DVP does or what owners of the DVP have been observing here.
you appear to be ignoring facts and obervations of actual owners in this very thread.

Lower PQ material will get the least benefit from the DVP because there are less details available to enhance.
Higher PQ material will get the most benefit from the DVP because there are details to enhance.

Anyway, I got mine on Saturday(thanks to AVS) and have been testing/watching various blu-ray material.
We like the range between 45-49 the best on HD mode.
We watched the Dark Knight, Watchmen, Cars, Patton, Logan's Run and sampled various other content.

Patton & Logan's run benefited the least from the DVP because their transfers are average.
Patton is so waxed out/DNR on some spots that the DVP can't do any enhancing I could tell at the ranges I was using.

Other movies we watched showed more pronouce details then the PQ would become soft on certain details when the DVP was turned off. You could tell it was doing its job.

Also, may be some do not see the benefits as dramatic if they are sitting/viewing 2x or more the screen distance from their display.
I sit about 8-9 feet from a 117" screen and the DVP enhanced the image without artifacts & were very welcomed to the PQ.

Although my PQ is already pretty sharp & detailed on my setup, the DVP is the best money I've spent to project a more eye pleasing picture.
Perhaps those with projectors, appropriate viewing distance and large screens benefit the most from the DVP.

*I have the DVP on the output of my AVR and about a 40ft HDMI run on a Monoprice CL2 cable to my projector and I had no issues with flickering, dropouts or color issues.
The LED & Darbee logo are enabled on default but can be disabled or dimmed.
post #1770 of 7870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazlog View Post

Larry did you get round to answering any of the questions Alan put to you?smile.gif

Ken Ross on post #114 of HTS summarizes well.
You may not be aware that I got banned from the HTS pretty quickly and without notification, despite not starting that Darblet thread, only posting an introductory comment after finding it on Google, and pointing out that there was already a healthy list of video experts who have reviewed it.
We have not given HTS a demo unit for it is against our policy. Despite repeated requests we have not given any of the many Forums around the world a demo unit.
BTW, we don't even give free demo units to our sales channels.
The commentary has always evolved organically, and could be characterized as similar in many of the forums. A progression from skeptical to appreciation.

There is plenty of future ahead and I am sure we will eventually have a friendly dialog with everyone.

-DD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Video Processors › Darbee vision darblet