or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › SONY VPL-VW500ES SXRD 4K Projector : IFA BERLIN 2013
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SONY VPL-VW500ES SXRD 4K Projector : IFA BERLIN 2013 - Page 6

post #151 of 482
Thread Starter 
http://www.projection-homecinema.fr/2013/09/02/2916/

2 more days to wait, but you can already see in the picture how this new Model will look. wink.gif
post #152 of 482
From the picture it looks pretty similar to 1000, right?
post #153 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

He is trying to drum up business I suspect. A warranted B stock Sony 1000ES is a great deal out there and is selling for less than the $15K of the coming cheaper Sony 4K. If you can afford a $15K purchase, the B stock 1000ES is the way to go. The existing 1000ES reportedly from back channels is still a better machine considering the glass and other things. For the vast majority $15K is simply not affordable and for most they will wait based on financial considerations alone another year for a 4K projector. Sony has tightened up its SURE pricing policy and I suspect only a small level of discounting will be allowed. Sony has made it very clear that dealers giving more than a small discount will be terminated. This will also cause the replacement Sony 50 to street for a higher price than the 50 did.

Will there be a flood of 4K content next year? Not likely. 4K content will indeed start to flow later this year, particularly from the Sony hockey puck server and down load service. The content preloaded on the server is of so so quality but the new movies coming on the download service wil undoubtedly be of higher 4K quality. 4K bluray if it comes will be a year off and then titles will only slowly flow. The best shot for 4K content will be using the Redray server priced factory direct at $1750 but still not shipping and content supplied in 4K for a fee from Odemax and an emerging competitor. No major studios but a lot of Indy stuff, some quite good. The coming Nanoteck server looks like a joke given the memory size. Buy a 4K projector now because there will be a flood of 4K content coming?

If you want to buy a Sony projector, and I love my 1000ES which I have owned for about 1 1/2 years but watch only 720p and 1080i and 1080p upscaled to 4HD, call Mike at AV Science, a AV Science Forum sponsor. He is a straight shooter and will give you the true lowdown .

Mark

Your hysterical-

You've singe handily destroyed Sony's Pricing model year after year when you were peddling for AVS.. Sony wants you gone from the business and wishes you would go away. You lowballed and sold tonnage of Sony product for years and never cared if you shipped into any other dealers territory. I know this because i lost many customers to you doing a $200 deal on a 25K projector. I of course tried to compete but you dont think anyone else should do business except for yourself. You did this to JVC and Sony and I am sure your doing this with god knows what other brands.

Dont call people trolls when you are the master of this.
post #154 of 482
How about you don't pretend you speak for Sony, and maybe take your e-penis contest offline. This has nothing to do with the thread and is completely unhelpful to members.
post #155 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by VGI View Post

Mark

Your hysterical-

You've singe handily destroyed Sony's Pricing model year after year when you were peddling for AVS.. Sony wants you gone from the business and wishes you would go away. You lowballed and sold tonnage of Sony product for years and never cared if you shipped into any other dealers territory. I know this because i lost many customers to you doing a $200 deal on a 25K projector. I of course tried to compete but you dont think anyone else should do business except for yourself. You did this to JVC and Sony and I am sure your doing this with god knows what other brands.

Dont call people trolls when you are the master of this.

More power to the destruction of Sony's price-fixing behavior.
post #156 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

More power to the destruction of Sony's price-fixing behavior.

A men!!!!
post #157 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Dave View Post

How about you don't pretend you speak for Sony, and maybe take your e-penis contest offline. This has nothing to do with the thread and is completely unhelpful to members.

I've never heard of that term before.............................

Is that typing without fingers? (puzzled look)
post #158 of 482
It's the age-old "mine is bigger than yours" argument, only it takes place on the internet.
post #159 of 482
All I said was that Sony was tightening its SURE Pricing policy this year in response to your the 55 is priced to sell statement. As a lawyer, retired, I can unequivocally state it is not price fixing and has been upheld by the courts. Some manufacturers have unilateral pricing policies, others don't. I made no mention of your pricing policies whatever they are in my post.

I do strongly recommend AVS members purchasing from AV Science. Their sales people have great expertise and are straight shooters and it is a well run and managed company putting customers first and trying to assure their happiness. I am no longer employed by AV Science though I remain a strong friend of their ownership and employees. I do suggest that I never sold a $25000 Sony projector for $200 above cost or anything close to that.. But enough of this. I do take offense to dealers trolling for business on the forum when they are not forum sponsors and especially when they are blatantly coming up with false sales pitch for buying something. I can come up with good reasons for buying a 4K projector now and would be glad to help you learn how to pitch 4K for valid reasons A customer not wanting to miss the trickle of 4K content that will be starting soon and slowly increasing in volume is not one such reason. While there is a substantial benefit in splashing 8 million plus pixels on a screen instead of 2 million, to get the benefits of 4K source resolution, one would need a large screen say one at least 10 ft wide. Increased bit length and wider color spaces would benefit any resolution. Now about spending $15K on the new model Sony, its a question of discretionary cash and ones priorities. I know the vast majority of folks here can not afford a $15K machine. I know you don't recognize that because you said you couldn't see any reason for those here not to spring $15K or whatever street turns out to be. I suspect you really didn't mean that.

Myself? I have no regrets in buying my 1000ES and I have enjoyed it and the realism it transfers to my picture but in 1 1/2 years I have watched nada 4K content. The darn thing makes even DVDs look great. I would personally recommend buying a b stock 1000ES as perhaps the most cost effective way to get a high quality 4K projector.
Edited by mark haflich - 9/3/13 at 12:15am
post #160 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

... As a lawyer, retired, I can unequivocally state it is not price fixing and has been upheld by the courts. ....

Speaking as a non-lawyer, if it walks like a duck, ....., it is.
post #161 of 482
I walked like a duck (tiblia tortion) befor I broke my ankle and leg. Now for the next 3 to 5 months I can't walk pending full bone healing. Quack.
post #162 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post

4K projectors should also have slight advantages over 2K projectors for 1080p playback, all else being equal. For one, you can do digital convergence correction in half 1080p pixel steps instead of full pixel steps without any negative side effects, which should improve sharpness, especially for 3-panel projectors. Another advantage is that upscaling 1080p content to 4K with a decent algorithm should make the image look more analog/natural, because aliasing should be greatly reduced.

Do you think 4k projectors are going to have more visible noise in the image, like 1080p projectors do compared to 720p. Granite if the source is perfectly clean, there isn't that much noise anymore, but heck I still see noise in some content. Especially with older movies, some older movies look way better on 720p projectors than 1080p due to how well the 720p projectors hide noise.

I wonder if 4k projectors are going to be more sensitive to video noise, we'll see soon enough. I've seen 4k projectors and watched some stuff on them, but not enough to actually judge noise.
post #163 of 482
Your question isn't very clear. Do you mean noise or grain? Blu-Rays usually don't have noise, they have grain. I personally have no problem with grain at all. If you hate it so much, you can turn on noise reduction in your projector, but that might also eat away some image detail. And then, are you asking whether 4K projectors are going to have more noise/grain when playing back 1080p content, or when playing back 4K content? I would expect the grain to be smaller/finer with 4K content compared to 2K content, but of course that depends on the film stock used for filming, and how good the scan is etc...
post #164 of 482
It was a simple and clear question, but ok. Whether it is noise or grain, grain can cause noise and vice versa. Generally image noise is anything undesirable in the source, whether that be grain or random distortion, anything that looks unnatural and though not always - but usually uneven between the different colors or contrast spots.

From the WIKI:
Image noise is random (not present in the object imaged) variation of brightness or color information in images, and is usually an aspect of electronic noise. It can be produced by the sensor and circuitry of a scanner or digital camera. Image noise can also originate in film grain and in the unavoidable shot noise of an ideal photon detector. Image noise is an undesirable by-product of image capture that adds spurious and extraneous information.

Now even digital movie cameras could introduce what some might call grain in certain situations after the effects and other things are mastered, but if we want to over-analyze the difference between what noise means, then I guess so.
Edited by coderguy - 9/3/13 at 4:31am
post #165 of 482
On this forum usually "noise" is considered a bad thing, while "grain" is usually considered a good thing. That's why I said that your question was not clear. "Noise" is usually considered an artifact caused by bad processing, a bad scan, a bad display, whatever. Film grain is a totally different thing. It's simply the way film looks like, and as such is not considered an artifact, but instead "part of the picture".

Most of the film purists here on this forum prefer film grain to be scanned properly and not be filtered away by the studios. Furthermore the majority here wants our projectors to properly show the grain and not to hide it. Blu-Rays having clearly visible (natural) film grain is usually a sign of a *good* transfer. If you prefer 720p projection without any grain then maybe you should stay away from 4K projection, or maybe just turn the DNR knob in your projector way up. You're in the minority on this forum, though.

Of course projection should not "enhance" the grain. It should just show it as it is encoded in the source material.

Edit: And no, noise does not cause grain.
post #166 of 482
Let's simplify this.,...

720 projectors do not just hide grain less, they show everything less (artifacts, grain, and noise). I do not prefer 720p over 1080p, as I am not that picky, and I do like having those clean scenes that look sharper in 1080p.

The Wiki definition of noise and grain is accurate, it is much more detailed then that definition. Noise and grain can crossover and you can have both, grain is in fact on digital media often a type of noise.

Here is a good way to think about it:
It's iike saying what is worse, the avalanche or the blowing snow, the blowing snow in one case may not come from the avalanche, but the avalanche can also cause blowing snow. Furthermore, blowing snow by itself can trigger the avalanche. Yes, snow can blow by itself, and some avalanches don't cause much blowing snow, but they are not exclusive to each other and they are IN SOME cases related, and in all cases somehow interacting.

Film grain is not the same from one movie to another obviously (digital cameras have very little grain these days, I think some of it is added on purpose). Analog film grain was obviously more pronounced than on the digital cameras they use today.
Edited by coderguy - 9/3/13 at 5:44am
post #167 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post

Edit: And no, noise does not cause grain.

I disagree...
Digital and Analog noise are different though, if speaking of Digital Noise, I would think, yah it definitely can. If speaking of Analog noise, then we'd have to argue on semantics.

From the WIKI:
Image noise can also originate in film grain and in the unavoidable shot noise of an ideal photon detector

So to say that GRAIN and NOISE are mutually exclusive does not work IMO, unless we are referring to one specific type of grain (but the film grain we see is different from movie to movie, 35mm vs 16mm, camera brand to camera brand, digital vs. analog, different mastering processes and cleanup algorithms, etc..). So we cannot just call it "film grain" either.

So since we are now over-analyzing this, then even if we were to refer to it as "analog film grain", then it varies between the source and camera type and mm size of the film. So there is no simple, this is grain and that is noise formula. Then some of that original grain might be enhanced accidentally by digital mastering (or removed), so my point is, you cannot separate grain and noise these days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_noise

From the NET:

Higher ISO film tended to have more grain; and higher ISO digital shots exhibit more noise - a similar cause, but the visual appearance is different.

Digital ISO noise is related to the size of each pixel, as the noise is per-pixel (so the more pixels you have, the less obvious noise is when viewed the same size), whereas with film, the noise is per crystal - you need larger crystals for higher sensitivity.

Film grain is generally not as even looking as Digital Grain or Remastered Grain, though they can sometimes look similar. I think film grain is what people prefer, not digital grain. The problem is digital sources from non-analog origins do not contain film grain, so they either added it or it was there from Digital Noise (that is my take on it).
Edited by coderguy - 9/3/13 at 4:01am
post #168 of 482
Thinking about digital ISO, the higher the ISO, the more the signal is amplified and the higher the amplification the more the noise that will be added. As technology advances and amplification noise lowered, the less ISO will affect noise.
post #169 of 482
@coderguy, as I explained before:

While grain might be considered a type of "noise" by some people (and wikipedia), it is not usually called "noise" here on this forum because the word "noise" usually comes with a bad association, while film grain is considered a good thing by most people here. E.g. some types of displays can show relatively high noise levels (e.g. due to dithering), even if the source is clean. That's a bad thing. However, a display showing film grain exactly as it is encoded on the disc is a good thing.

Anyway, I think I answered your question, so this is my last post on this topic.
post #170 of 482
Found this on the NET, here you go:

Digital photography does not exhibit film grain, since there is no film for any grain to exist within.

In digital photography, image noise sometimes appears as a "grain-like" effect.

Film grain or granularity was originally the random optical texture of processed photographic film due to the presence of small particles of a metallic silver, or dye clouds, developed from silver halide that have received enough photons.

Are you referring to a specific common camera (maybe a 35mm panamax) used in the 1960's to 1980's or whatever, or are you referring to newer cameras. Are you referring to generally unmastered or overly mastered. What about how old the analog REEL was in the movie theaters before we went all digital (wasn't the number of times the reel was viewed a big source of some film grain)?

The grain is different in every movie, from every camera, from every mm used of film, from digital to analog sources, and whether displayed on a digital or analog device, from heavy mastering and digital filtering to movies that were purely transferred and the old analog mastering techniques. Even the very digital displays we view things on can show less or more grain than another display. Way too many variables IMHO.

With digital medium, there is no such generic thing as an all-encompassing source of FILM GRAIN and you cannot separate it from noise just by looking at a transfer visually through a digital medium (source to destination), the only time this does not apply is if the grain was added artificially through FGO, then it was obviously not noise, but it might still be hard to separate visually from noise, since the grain is highlighted by the noise and vice versa.

In digital cameras, the closest physical equivalents of film grains are the individual elements of the image sensor (e.g. CCD cell), the pixels; just as small-grain film has better resolution than large-grain film, so will an image sensor with more elements result in an image with better resolution. However, unlike pixels, film grain does not represent the limit of resolution. As film grains are randomly distributed and have size variation, while image sensor cells are of same size and are arranged in a grid, direct comparison of film and digital resolutions is not straightforward.

In general, as the pixels from a digital image sensor are set in straight lines, they irritate the eye of the viewer more than the randomly arranged film grains. Most people will reject an enlargement that show pixels, whereas a grained film enlagement with lower resolution will be acceptable, and perceived as 'sharper'.

The effect of film grain can be simulated in some digital photo manipulation programs, such as Photoshop, adding grain to a digital image after it is taken. It can also be added by FGO.
Edited by coderguy - 9/3/13 at 5:58am
post #171 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gradius2 View Post

I can see this puppy at $6999 on street.

I can too, in two or three years. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #172 of 482
It better have freaking laser beams for 15k. biggrin.gif

Kraine is hyping up the new Sony. I'm thinking we may see a laser light source?
post #173 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by conan48 View Post

It better have freaking laser beams for 15k. biggrin.gif

Kraine is hyping up the new Sony. I'm thinking we may see a laser light source?

I am not expecting to see laser this year.
Reply
Reply
post #174 of 482
$15K is a pretty significantly lowering of 4K entry level from the $25K MSRP of the 1000ES 2 years ago, Probably not as bright (less powerful bulb) and a 4K lens of lesser quality. Probably some improvement in inputs (frame rates in at UHD and HDMI 2.0) Now there will be a replacement for the 50, about the same prices MSRP of the 50 but a higher street this year.


The big speculation is will the 1000ES be replaced or will it remain and will there be the addition of a higher priced model. Once again assuming no laser but a bulb source of illumination, the changes might be mostly frame rate, HDMI 2.0. A new model here might offer a sneak peak of the 1000ES with an upgraded input board and might be very close to a 1000ES when Sony offers a new input board for it. It would be really difficult to substantially improve on the 1000ES at this point in time. Oh yea, we are going to hear at Cedia the procedures for making our 1000ES's compatible with the hockey puck server.

Now I would stress that with a 4K projector, that's all that can be outputted. The issue is if one has two version of a source material, one in 2K and one in 4K, would the 4K material look substantially better than the 2K unless the screen is large, say greater than 10 ft in width. Clearly a 4K projector displaying 2K will look better than the same technology 2K projector displaying 2K.projector
Edited by mark haflich - 9/4/13 at 4:43am
post #175 of 482
Thread Starter 
In 10 hours from now you will have all the answers Mark. smile.gif
post #176 of 482
post #177 of 482
Wow, 32 audio channels. I dont know what will come out of this. But still...32 channels !
post #178 of 482
WTF are they thinking? Clearly 33 channels are needed or you might as well have a silent theater. I'm out. Morons. smile.gif
post #179 of 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

WTF are they thinking? Clearly 33 channels are needed or you might as well have a silent theater. I'm out. Morons. smile.gif

You know you'll be here, with the rest of us... Impatiently waiting for more information.

Is JVC going to show their projectors too? Anyone know?
post #180 of 482
Thread Starter 
No JVC woń´t show their new projectors at IFA
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › SONY VPL-VW500ES SXRD 4K Projector : IFA BERLIN 2013