AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Darbee Darblet
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Darbee Darblet - Page 6

post #151 of 188
10/14/12 at 11:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post

Anyone ?

I'll run HD Multiburst through mine in a day or two. That should show anything going on.

But as I said before, any image processor / enhancer / noise reducer is going to have artifacts. There is no free lunch. One thing I found is with older true 1920x1080i MPEG2 DVHS recordings, the Darbee actually makes them worse. But newer Dish recordings with MPEG4 at 1440x1080, the Darbee helps get them back to 1920 quality. For most BluRays, I shut it off.

The Darbee is just a tool and like most tools, it isn't good for everything. But for the price no serious HT should be without one IMO.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #152 of 188
10/14/12 at 11:48pm
I've already shown issues on the Spears & Munsil plates, which include highest frequency multibursts. But you don't notice such issues in normal video.

Dial the Darblet back, as most of us do anyway, and the test pattern issues fade...

The text artefacts are the main obvious problem for me, but again, dialed back, they rarely intrude.

Art, you need to buy one.
Reply
Reply
post #153 of 188
10/15/12 at 8:12am
Ok..help needed. Installed a Darbee...and I appreciate the difference, (...as seen below...) but it seems that while on / engaged the little Box showing the percentage of "Darbee-ization" remains on the Screen no mater what I do.

Switching to Demo mode started that...because before it was not doing so, but nothing I try, nor any combination of button pushing / Menu engagement / disengagement gets rid of it.

I have the unit in-line between my PJ and the HDMI output of the Receiver.

I'd hate to have to disconnect the thing, but..............................frown.gif


Left is Unprocessed .................................................................................................Right is "Darbee-ized at 60%


Darbee5thElement2.jpg


Darbee5thElement1.jpg


Darbee5thElemen4.jpg
Reply
Reply
post #154 of 188
10/15/12 at 8:22am

There's a setting in the "menu" to turn off the on-screen-display after a few seconds.

Reply
Reply
post #155 of 188
10/19/12 at 1:49am
I have been testing the darblet for a few weeks in my batcave with a Sony VPL VW-95ES. At around 40% (green) there is a clear accentuation of some detalis but I find the effect slightly unnatural and artificial. Turning it above 40% makes it worse. At 35% it is better, but then again the picture hardly changes at all.
Conclusion: I dont favor the processed artificial look the darblet delivers and I will get rid of it. One of the main reasons I chose the Sony 95 in the first place was the natural picture it has.
I can understand that many like the pop in the image (my 11 year old son thinks it´s great) but its not for me. I like it natural.
Reply
Reply
post #156 of 188
10/19/12 at 6:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hassesolo View Post

I have been testing the darblet for a few weeks in my batcave with a Sony VPL VW-95ES. At around 40% (green) there is a clear accentuation of some detalis but I find the effect slightly unnatural and artificial. Turning it above 40% makes it worse. At 35% it is better, but then again the picture hardly changes at all.
Conclusion: I dont favor the processed artificial look the darblet delivers and I will get rid of it. One of the main reasons I chose the Sony 95 in the first place was the natural picture it has.
I can understand that many like the pop in the image (my 11 year old son thinks it´s great) but its not for me. I like it natural.
At 35% there should be an obvious and clearly visible improvement. Has your Sony turned all sharpening and other artifact producing processing off? Darbee works best with digitally unmolested artifact free sources. If the picture already has a digitally processed look Darbee makes it look even worse.
Reply
Reply
post #157 of 188
10/20/12 at 3:55am
At 35% there is a clear but discrete alteration of the image. I would not call it an improvement though. It´s more an unnatural accentuation of contrast between pixels or microareas of the image leading to skin and hair appearing more coarse with a more "sandy" texture so to speak. It does not add any details but it makes some details stand out more clearly giving the false impression of more details. Personally I don´t favor the look of this processed image. The natural image is more pleasing to the (my) eye. I admit that it is an easy way to impress people less concerned with a natural image. At first glance it looks truly sharp and impressive with a lot of facial pores more clearly visible. But let us not forget that the pores are visible without the darblet too, they just don´t stand out like spots on a leopard...

I have no artificial sharpness or other image altering settings activated in my projector. Given the nature of my image preferences that is important for me.smile.gif I prefer a high fidelity image as close to the source material as possible.
Reply
Reply
post #158 of 188
10/21/12 at 2:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hassesolo View Post

At 35% there is a clear but discrete alteration of the image. I would not call it an improvement though. It´s more an unnatural accentuation of contrast between pixels or microareas of the image leading to skin and hair appearing more coarse with a more "sandy" texture so to speak. It does not add any details but it makes some details stand out more clearly giving the false impression of more details. Personally I don´t favor the look of this processed image. The natural image is more pleasing to the (my) eye. I admit that it is an easy way to impress people less concerned with a natural image. At first glance it looks truly sharp and impressive with a lot of facial pores more clearly visible. But let us not forget that the pores are visible without the darblet too, they just don´t stand out like spots on a leopard...
I have no artificial sharpness or other image altering settings activated in my projector. Given the nature of my image preferences that is important for me.smile.gif I prefer a high fidelity image as close to the source material as possible.
You can't have the cake and eat it too. If the picture is supposed to look visibly sharper than it actually is the sharpening will make it different in a way that can always be perceived as unnatural, processed or otherwise 'worse' in some way. There is no free lunch. Neither with Darbee or any other sharpening method. If the examples on the Darbee site where you can change the strength of the effect continuously there is no setting that makes enough of a difference without adding a look you don't like then Darbee (and possibly all other methods) is/are indeed not for you.
Only real higher resolution and a genuine higher MTF in your chain will then be an option (such as sharper lenses on the projector, on the camera that shot the content, on the scanner that scanned it, better internal pocessing methods in post production etc.). Some of these we can influence directly and some we can't at all. After the fact sharpening means always balancing compromises.
Reply
Reply
post #159 of 188
10/21/12 at 9:15am
I agree.
Reply
Reply
post #160 of 188
10/21/12 at 12:05pm
The other thing is, what's natural? Is it just setting the sharpness control on all your equipment, can't really be that because 0 is not neutral on all equipment, sometimes 0 is essentially a blur filter, sometimes it does sharpening. And then there's the issues different lenses and different imaging chips, and even different screens, heck, even different screen sizes, throws, calibrations, gamma settings, all factor into the apparent sharpness/detail level of a given image.

My point is I personally, without having seen each movie in the mastering booth, do not have high confidence that I can tell if the image I see in my HT is "natural" or "neutral", all I know is that my projector and other equipment are calibrated as best I can to the standards, and that with the I prefer the image with the Darblet in the path better than I do without the Darblet in the path. Others prefer it without, one person's "unnatural" image is another's "clear" image. I don't think either is right or wrong.
Reply
Reply
post #161 of 188
10/25/12 at 5:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

The other thing is, what's natural? My point is I personally, without having seen each movie in the mastering booth, do not have high confidence that I can tell if the image I see in my HT is "natural" or "neutral", all I know is that my projector and other equipment are calibrated as best I can to the standards, and that with the I prefer the image with the Darblet in the path better than I do without the Darblet in the path. Others prefer it without, one person's "unnatural" image is another's "clear" image. I don't think either is right or wrong.

over time you may change your mind?

I am going to try one out myself on a 59" Plasma.

everybody says 45% for HD mode, is this a magic number or do some people actaully prefer using only 35% with good results?
Reply
Reply
post #162 of 188
10/27/12 at 12:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobbyTV View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post

The other thing is, what's natural? My point is I personally, without having seen each movie in the mastering booth, do not have high confidence that I can tell if the image I see in my HT is "natural" or "neutral", all I know is that my projector and other equipment are calibrated as best I can to the standards, and that with the I prefer the image with the Darblet in the path better than I do without the Darblet in the path. Others prefer it without, one person's "unnatural" image is another's "clear" image. I don't think either is right or wrong.
over time you may change your mind?
I am going to try one out myself on a 59" Plasma.
everybody says 45% for HD mode, is this a magic number or do some people actaully prefer using only 35% with good results?
As I said before the right number is subjective and for me it clearly depends on the source. The less digitally manipulated the source is (the fewer digital artifacts are already baked in) the more Darbee it can take before it looks overprocessed. A source with obvious edge enhancement or nasty DNR artifacts may tolerate no Darbee at all since the artifacts get more visible as soon as Darbee kicks in. But then again some people might be willing to put up with the artifacts since they also get a "sharper" picture overall. With clean and sharp sources I find 35% or 40% the upper border after which skin detail becomes more and more unnatural (while other textures may still look fine). Very clean but soft sources can take more.
Reply
Reply
post #163 of 188
10/28/12 at 1:05pm
I've had the Darbee for a few months, but recently got it back updated to work trouble free with my Lumagen Radiance XE to my Sim2 C3X 1080 DLP projector.
Recently, we moved the Darbee to the end of a 40' BlueJeans HDMI cable output from the Lumagen. After the Darbee, a 6' BlueJeans HDMI cable connects to the projector. I use minimum 6' HDMI cables as I, and others with Lumagen, have found that Patrick Harkin of Lumagen was correct when he advised that less than 6' HDMI cablers can cause HDMI handshake issues, etc due to reflections.

I mostly set the Darbee T 35%, as above that level seems to "squish" the more 3D natural picture that I get using the Darbee. I definitely prefer the Darbee in the chain for both DirecTV and for blu ray.
Reply
Reply
post #164 of 188
11/5/12 at 3:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky View Post

....he advised that less than 6' HDMI cablers can cause HDMI handshake issues, etc due to reflections.

 

 

Now that's a new one on me!  Interesting..

Reply
Reply
post #165 of 188
11/5/12 at 7:08pm
I was surprised, too. But Patrick Harkins of Lumagen psoted this in the Lumagen threadi in the video Processor forum some months ago, and a number of forum members, including me, who had HDMI problems resolved them using minimum 6' length HDMI cables. Patrick Harkins explained that there is a reflections problem with too short of HDMI cables!@@rolleyes.gif
Reply
Reply
post #166 of 188
11/6/12 at 4:45am
Anthem gives the same recommendations as well.
Reply
Reply
post #167 of 188
11/6/12 at 5:39am

Oh well, that's why God made tie-wraps for us. wink.gif

 

Or just use a really short cable and tie a knot in it.


Edited by Solfan - 11/6/12 at 2:35pm
Reply
Reply
post #168 of 188
11/14/12 at 9:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by flint350 View Post

There's a setting in the "menu" to turn off the on-screen-display after a few seconds.
A late response.

Thanks!


That did it.


BTW....I went back to a previous Customer who has a Epson 6010 in a Dedicated Theater and installed a Darbee as a "Test". The fellow asked, "Why the hell didn't you have one installed at the beginning!!!!"

Imagine being taken to task for such an oversight..... rolleyes.gif

Brook no mistake....the average End User will almost always be seriously enamored with the device in-line....and the Demo Mode pretty much assures that.
Reply
Reply
post #169 of 188
11/14/12 at 2:39pm
I guess I'm the latest AVS'er to get a Darbee. Hooked it up to the HDMI cable going into my HOST on my Lumis. I like it. Demo mode is not so good for seeing what this box does. Better to just toggle it on and off. I can't for the life of me see any difference between the HD and Game settings. I've sort of settled on a setting of 38 - 40 on Pop. Looks good with Blu Ray and HDTV on Dish. I'll have to play with again tonite. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #170 of 188
11/17/12 at 4:08am
Hi all. I've been saying Darbee Darblet to my wife now for three days as a hint. wink.gif

But before she succumbs to my manipulation, I want to know what frame rate does the Darblet output at 1080p? Will it accept/send a 1080p/24 signal or does it only take 60fps and output that. I'll be using it on my 151fd.
Reply
Reply
post #171 of 188
11/19/12 at 1:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbuudo07 View Post

Hi all. I've been saying Darbee Darblet to my wife now for three days as a hint. wink.gif
But before she succumbs to my manipulation, I want to know what frame rate does the Darblet output at 1080p? Will it accept/send a 1080p/24 signal or does it only take 60fps and output that. I'll be using it on my 151fd.

It accepts and passes 1080/24p, 1080/50p and 1080/60p as it can't do any conversion only pass it thorough. AFAIK it accepts and passes all the usual SD and HD resolutions (480ip,576ip, 720p and 1080ip) and frame rates, though mine is connected after my Lumagen Mini3D so it only sees 1080 at 24/50/60p.
Reply
Reply
post #172 of 188
11/20/12 at 9:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hassesolo View Post

I have been testing the darblet for a few weeks in my batcave with a Sony VPL VW-95ES. At around 40% (green) there is a clear accentuation of some detalis but I find the effect slightly unnatural and artificial. Turning it above 40% makes it worse. At 35% it is better, but then again the picture hardly changes at all.
Conclusion: I dont favor the processed artificial look the darblet delivers and I will get rid of it. One of the main reasons I chose the Sony 95 in the first place was the natural picture it has.
I can understand that many like the pop in the image (my 11 year old son thinks it´s great) but its not for me. I like it natural.

Hello

are you talking about soap opera effect? If it is, i hate it. Can you pls give some info about that? Darbee makes soap opera effect or not? Thanks
Reply
Reply
post #173 of 188
11/20/12 at 11:26am
Not it does not, it doesn't do anything like frame interpolation/soap opera effect.
Reply
Reply
post #174 of 188
11/20/12 at 12:55pm
Quote:
Not it does not, it doesn't do anything like frame interpolation/soap opera effect

I don't see a soap opera effect either. *


















* Unless I'm watching All My Children with it.wink.gif
Reply
Reply
post #175 of 188
11/28/12 at 1:09pm
If you haven't listened to this show on the darblet you should. It provides good information regarding the technology provided by the inventor.

http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/135
Reply
Reply
post #176 of 188
11/28/12 at 3:25pm
I use the Darblet religeously with my Sony VPL-vw1000ES. I have i set to HD about 40 To me it just brings out the fine detail already in the source making it much more visable much in the same way a magnifying class maks detail visable but of course it doesn't make the image larger. Clearly, the bigger the image the more the darblet works to better the picture. it is not totlly artifact free though two in series trusted sources tell me removes most of the artifacting. These is a device which is very inexpensive and most vendors have a trial period. Rather than trying to decide whether you intellectually are red or blue about the Darblet, my advice is to just try and not rely on what some idiot like me or some UK folks might say.
Reply
Reply
post #177 of 188
11/28/12 at 10:53pm
Mine just arrived yesterday. I picked it up from the AVS store during the Black Friday sale. I'm looking forward trying the Darbee out on the 6020 once my 120" wide AT Seymour screen arrives in early December.

Until then I'm using a bed sheet. rolleyes.gif
Reply
Reply
post #178 of 188
11/30/12 at 8:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhafner View Post

You can't have the cake and eat it too. If the picture is supposed to look visibly sharper than it actually is the sharpening will make it different in a way that can always be perceived as unnatural, processed or otherwise 'worse' in some way. There is no free lunch. Neither with Darbee or any other sharpening method. If the examples on the Darbee site where you can change the strength of the effect continuously there is no setting that makes enough of a difference without adding a look you don't like then Darbee (and possibly all other methods) is/are indeed not for you.
Only real higher resolution and a genuine higher MTF in your chain will then be an option (such as sharper lenses on the projector, on the camera that shot the content, on the scanner that scanned it, better internal pocessing methods in post production etc.). Some of these we can influence directly and some we can't at all. After the fact sharpening means always balancing compromises.

A great post that says it all.
Reply
Reply
post #179 of 188
11/30/12 at 8:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rx-8 View Post

Mine just arrived yesterday. I picked it up from the AVS store during the Black Friday sale. I'm looking forward trying the Darbee out on the 6020 once my 120" wide AT Seymour screen arrives in early December.
Until then I'm using a bed sheet. rolleyes.gif

What are you using the bed sheet for? I hope you mean you are using it for a screen which your post in context would imply.
Reply
Reply
post #180 of 188
11/30/12 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by rx-8 View Post

Mine just arrived yesterday. I picked it up from the AVS store during the Black Friday sale. I'm looking forward trying the Darbee out on the 6020 once my 120" wide AT Seymour screen arrives in early December.
Until then I'm using a bed sheet. rolleyes.gif

What are you using the bed sheet for? I hope you mean you are using it for a screen which your post in context would imply.

Hi Mark,

Yes I'm using a white bed sheet as a temporary screen. My 6020 was delivered before I got my screen - this is my first projector. The day I got my projector I was projecting the image on an unfinished basement wall complete with the pink insolation going half way down the wall. eek.gif

I latter put up the bed sheet to improve the picture which it did. My screen should be shipped next week, but until then the bed sheet is the best solution I have at this time. It's obviously far from ideal but it's a palatable solution. I won't even try my Darbee until my screen gets installed.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Darbee Darblet