AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › motion flow test scenes?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

motion flow test scenes?

post #1 of 63
1/15/13 at 10:37am
Thread Starter 
I have an rs2 that I'm happy with but i seem to be really bothered with motion flow. especially in scenes where the camera pans from side to side. (the opening shot in Reds panning down the street of houses, faster downfield passes in football games, etc.)

my question is are there any scenes that are recommended to view to see if I'm seriously afflicted or is this just life with earlier jvc's? i like the blacks but am thinking about a Sony hw50 for better motion.

thanks!
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 63
1/15/13 at 12:39pm
You aren't experiencing anything odd. This is just the nature of all JVC projectors. The newer generation models handle motion a little bit better but motion problems are still there and noticeable. The Sony should handle much nicer even compared to the newest JVC models.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 63
1/15/13 at 12:46pm
Thread Starter 
thank you for answering.

Wes
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 63
1/15/13 at 1:20pm
I've studied this closely watching the JVC RS55 and Sony HW50 in a direct A/B configuration, I don't really see an obvious difference between the two. I can see preferring the motion flow of the Sony vs. JVC's FI, but natively, I think it's a bit blown out of proportion when directly compared.

I have several demo disks (not for public distribution) that focus strictly on motion resolution. When pushed, all these projectors could use some help in this area.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 63
1/15/13 at 1:43pm
Some people are a lot more sensitive to it. Your perception of how motion looks could be different than how Wes and I perceive it as. I think for many owners they simply aren't bothered or aren't aware of it. I can say after owning an X3 that there is still motion shortcomings that are still behind that of many 3LCD and definitely DLP projectors. There's a reason you still see these threads popping up. I realize they have tried to help the issue but clearly it's still there as I've seen many people who own current models complaining. If the issue wasn't as bad as you and others make it out to be there wouldn't be nearly as many people bringing it up. Like I said before, it isn't brought up quite as much as before only because it's marginally better than previous models. But the fact people still comment on it means that there is a problem and JVC (and others) should do there best to change things.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 63
1/15/13 at 2:23pm
I have Optoma HD8300 and had used cheaper HD33 for a while before that. Both have PureMotion without which i would never consider purchasing any of these. PureMotion makes picture free of stutter in fast moving scenes. Some users report this to be unnatural and not movie theater like and I respectfully disagree. This is actually closer to how movies looked in theaters 30+ years back when film projection was used were entire frame appeared on the screen at the same time unlike crt or digital projectors where picture is dran on screen like by line making fast moving objects to be stuttering.
For me today movie theater picture is not a reference that is why I welcome motion interpolation alghorithms in modern projectors as well as tv sets. They all very between manufacturers some are good other are better. Some make picture room look extreme smooth - soap opera like, that is why it is always good to preview display or pj before making decision about purchase to make sure the picture meets your expectations.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 63
1/15/13 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

I've studied this closely watching the JVC RS55 and Sony HW50 in a direct A/B configuration, I don't really see an obvious difference between the two. I can see preferring the motion flow of the Sony vs. JVC's FI, but natively, I think it's a bit blown out of proportion when directly compared.

I have several demo disks (not for public distribution) that focus strictly on motion resolution. When pushed, all these projectors could use some help in this area.

Nice to hear that Jason as I have, maybe most of us, gotten the impression that last 2-3 years JVC is giving up "a lot" to Sony in that area. And you (me) kind of wonder if you should "cross over" though liking very much other areas of JVC's performance in comparison.

Also, and I think many others here feel the same way, you personally have reached I think one of the more upper levels of recognition for the "quality" of your HT projection equipment findings and other HT thoughts. I could name some names, who because of their attention to detail and methodology we all look forward to hearing what "they" say about the performance of new equipment. But I won't, as we all have our own special lists. You are moving into that echelon in my opinion. The methodology certainly, and also the sheer amount of time you have to spend doing it as comprehensively as you do to give that information to us. Props!
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 63
1/15/13 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by esdwa View Post

I have Optoma HD8300 and had used cheaper HD33 for a while before that. Both have PureMotion without which i would never consider purchasing any of these. PureMotion makes picture free of stutter in fast moving scenes. Some users report this to be unnatural and not movie theater like and I respectfully disagree. This is actually closer to how movies looked in theaters 30+ years back when film projection was used were entire frame appeared on the screen at the same time unlike crt or digital projectors where picture is dran on screen like by line making fast moving objects to be stuttering.
For me today movie theater picture is not a reference that is why I welcome motion interpolation alghorithms in modern projectors as well as tv sets. They all very between manufacturers some are good other are better. Some make picture room look extreme smooth - soap opera like, that is why it is always good to preview display or pj before making decision about purchase to make sure the picture meets your expectations.

Zombie and I are not talking about CFI Motion Smoothing. We're talking about how a projector handles motion natively.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 63
1/15/13 at 2:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonF View Post

Nice to hear that Jason as I have, maybe most of us, gotten the impression that last 2-3 years JVC is giving up "a lot" to Sony in that area. And you (me) kind of wonder if you should "cross over" though liking very much other areas of JVC's performance in comparison.

Also, and I think many others here feel the same way, you personally have reached I think one of the more upper levels of recognition for the "quality" of your HT projection equipment findings and other HT thoughts. I could name some names, who because of their attention to detail and methodology we all look forward to hearing what "they" say about the performance of new equipment. But I won't, as we all have our own special lists. You are moving into that echelon in my opinion. The methodology certainly, and also the sheer amount of time you have to spend doing it as comprehensively as you do to give that information to us. Props!

I don't mean to hate on JVC or anyones opinion, but like I said before, perceived motion is all subjective. Much like CFI lovers versus CFI haters. Some think it works well others find that it has too many artifacts. Posted about an hour ago in the Sony HW50ES thread by conan48 :
Quote:
Finally got around to testing out the Sony after a long vacation and it's pretty damn amazing. Forgot how good the motion is on this thing when compared to the JVCs I had for the last few years and it's better then the Epson too.

Zombie may not perceive the faults in motion as some other people do or he does see them and doesn't think they warrant any complaint and that's perfectly fine but I don't want people to think that the issue somehow mysteriously dissapeared. If JVC had truly done an overhaul in this area don't think for a minute they'd be all hush-hush about it. They have marginally improved motion over the last couple generations, but nothing substantial like Sony did starting with the 30ES and 90ES.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 63
1/15/13 at 2:43pm
I think a lot of the issues people report with fast pans in films are an issue with 24fps capture and not with the PJ itself. You see this with film and DLP D-Cinema projection all the time, it isn't exclusive to any brand of PJ. Motion resolution is another issue though and has varying degrees of quality from brand to brand.
Quote:
This is actually closer to how movies looked in theaters 30+ years back when film projection was used were entire frame appeared on the screen at the same time unlike crt or digital projectors where picture is dran on screen like by line making fast moving objects to be stuttering.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. Images on today's PJs aren't drawn line by line unless you are still thinking that most of us use bulky CRT projectors. All digital projectors are doing frame by frame in different ways, but none of them are doing lines. Film has plenty of judder in panning, it is a byproduct of 24fps capture and always will be. Best DOPs try and limit the problem with controlled pans that don't go as fast.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 63
1/15/13 at 3:03pm
I keep hoping someone would use the Accupel motion patterns to see how Sony and JVC compare.....
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 63
1/15/13 at 3:34pm
I'm not sure what the OP is asking. Does he like Motion flow or not like it? He states he's bothered by it but titled the thread as motion flow test scenes. If he doesn't like it why would he want to test it?

The RS2 does not have any type of frame interpolation. I remember when owning one of seeing stuttering in pans but I also remember seeing a bit of motion blur as well during fast movement. When I originally purchased my RS2 I didn't use FI right away and in that regard from memory it didn't seem like the picture blurred and stuttered quite as much during pans and fast motion. CFI smoothed it out but JVC's CFI did exhibit artifacts. Sony's motion flow isn't perfect but motion does seem more fluid with less artifacts but there is always some of the video look with motion flow turned on. Not quite as much in low mode as in high mode.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 63
1/15/13 at 4:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes k View Post

I have an rs2 that I'm happy with but i seem to be really bothered with motion flow. especially in scenes where the camera pans from side to side. (the opening shot in Reds panning down the street of houses, faster downfield passes in football games, etc.)

my question is are there any scenes that are recommended to view to see if I'm seriously afflicted or is this just life with earlier jvc's? i like the blacks but am thinking about a Sony hw50 for better motion.

thanks!

I think Wes is saying he is bothered by native motion on his JVC.
The question is regarding specific scene's with bad motion to test on the Sony 50. Is this correct Wes?
I personally do not like the soap opera effect brought on by Sony's motion flow.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 63
1/15/13 at 4:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

I don't mean to hate on JVC or anyones opinion, but like I said before, perceived motion is all subjective. Much like CFI lovers versus CFI haters. Some think it works well others find that it has too many artifacts. Posted about an hour ago in the Sony HW50ES thread by conan48 :

Zombie may not perceive the faults in motion as some other people do or he does see them and doesn't think they warrant any complaint and that's perfectly fine but I don't want people to think that the issue somehow mysteriously dissapeared. If JVC had truly done an overhaul in this area don't think for a minute they'd be all hush-hush about it. They have marginally improved motion over the last couple generations, but nothing substantial like Sony did starting with the 30ES and 90ES.

I'm actually quite sensitive to motion artifacts, RBE, etc. My comment is that if we take the honey moon phase away from new owners and do an objective, direct A/B analysis, I just don't see this as a real sticking point between the HW50 and the RS55 (unless we start comparing FI modes).

Very few people have the resources to directly compare over an extended period of time. After looking at these projectors under a microscope with a split source, I wouldn't trust my memory for an hour, let alone after days, weeks or months.

We all have specific points that are important to us individually. The following are areas I focus on:

  • Single chip DLP RBE- Even with the HC8000 @ 6x, the RBE was bothering me in dark scenes. For some reason the lower contrast BQ W7000 doesn't bother me anywhere near as much. Every DLP i've seen, I can see RBE, including the 11S2 @ 6x that a friend of mine owns. Not everyone is this sensitive, but I am and it's a been a deal-breaker for me to own a single chip DLP as a primary 2D display.

  • Black floor - With my newly blacked out room, there isn't a DLP in the under 10K price range that is going to satisfy me for my dark sci-fi and stage concerts. The room darkening was a bit of a punch in the face when we challenge the heck out of the projector with dark scenes. Even the JVC could use some help here once there is absolutely nothing in the room to take the attention away from the screen. (ie. the old hand-puppet technique, we all wish it was dead black).

  • 3D ghosting / flicker - DLP's own this segment right now and they provide some of the best 3D i've seen yet. The Epson is the closest i've seen so far, but still not as perfect as the DLP's.


just these points alone are the reason I have multiple projectors. different projectors for different content. I use the projector that looks best to me for the content I am watching.

The HW50 is an excellent projector, but after having the HW30, HW50 and calibrating a number of VW95's, I honestly don't see this specific topic as a major point if someone is highly sensitive to motion and doesn't like the FI modes. There are better projectors if this is the case.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 63
1/15/13 at 4:27pm
Yes, that's all fine and dandy, but if someone were to be looking at only, say, the Sony 50ES and a JVC X30 you're telling me that native motion handling between the two is on par with each other? If you say yes, I won't know what to say.

I want to further add that I don't mean things like how smooth 24p looks and how stutter free pans are. I'm more referring to motion resolution on a native level. There is just a noticeable amount of "smear" with certain types of motion with JVC projectors that is close to absent with other technologies (and other iterations of LCOS technology). From what I've seen on a couple demos with Sony's newer projectors it doesn't seem to be anywhere near as bad. There are also countless professional reviews that also concur with my findings about how well Sony's newer 240hz panels deal with motion. I think the technical term is motion induced contouring. I will admit that my older RS20 was by far worse than the recent X3 I had. But that's not to say it's gone completely.

If someone were only looking at LCOS models, motion handling on a native level is better on Sony projectors. Their panels simply respond faster and deal with motion better. That is how things are.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 63
1/15/13 at 4:50pm
then by that statement, the 480hz panels on the Epson should be even better than the Sony? My motion test disk that I use is brutal. I'd want to turn FI on any of these projectors with motion that is this intense. it's going to vary by the content and the individuals sensitivity to it. There are no absolutes here.

It's been said by several trusted sources that the e-shift process increases the perception of motion handling, so I am not talking about the HW50 vs. the X3.

I'm also not refuting that JVC needs to step up the game at the end of 2013 with faster panels, the 3D performance is an indicator as the other non DLP projectors continue to gain ground.

The Sony is better, but not the day/night difference that is being portrayed. My first instinct with the HW50 was to turn on the FI during certain movies. This is not a DLP projector.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 63
1/15/13 at 4:58pm
The refresh rate number isn't always a contributing factor to the overall look and I didn't mean it to come off that way. We all know published numbers mean nothing, especially with today's On/Off numbers claiming to be in the millions. I just don't think that the user should have to rely on an FI system or some sort of optical trickery (e-shift). The way it stands as of today is that without an FI system or e-shift is that Sony's panels are better at motion. That's the only point I've been trying to make
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 63
1/15/13 at 10:33pm
Motion induced contouring was pretty bad with the older JVC units. I noticed it quite a bit. It was almost eliminated starting with last years models though. There were some great scenes for testing this (Cars comes to mind) and the newer models have virtually eliminated it. I see the problem more on my VT50 plasma than on my JVC, and I keep an eye out since it bothered me on the older ones. My RS2 was really bad with this. The RS35 was better ut still showed it from time to time. I rarely ever see it now if ever.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 63
1/16/13 at 5:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

The refresh rate number isn't always a contributing factor to the overall look and I didn't mean it to come off that way. We all know published numbers mean nothing, especially with today's On/Off numbers claiming to be in the millions. I just don't think that the user should have to rely on an FI system or some sort of optical trickery (e-shift). The way it stands as of today is that without an FI system or e-shift is that Sony's panels are better at motion. That's the only point I've been trying to make


We seem to be talking, actually I won't lower myself into a we here smile.gif, about a variety of different motion artificacts, most of which are simply reproduction of the source and the way it was shot and then blaming what you accurately see on the projector manufacturer.

Rather then attempting to discuss this, let me just say things like FPS shot (normally 24), focal length, SHUTTER speed, speed of the object being shot, distance from the object of the camera which is of course related to the focal length, whether the moving object is being panned in that the lens is kept on the object as best as posssible, whether the object is stationary and the camera is being panned, the technoloy of the display panel.

Motion blur caused by the panel, a contouring and a smearing has gotten better in lcd land, never a problem in DLP land.

Motion handling doesn't deal with this problem. Motion handling deals with source limitations. nothing to do with the method of projection or display essentially. We can add more frames by computer generation and thenm that depends on how powerful the computer is (built into the projector) and the quality of the algs. We can add black frames to help our brains process and not blur things as much. Avery very complex subject and much more of a problem for video than film before it ios inherent in film. Video has different aspects and often shows continuous motion. Sportds. You want to be as it would be if you were there. No blur.

In films, you want blur, you want judder, you want flicker. You want our miserable projectors to reproduce the source and its crappy 24 fps accurately. Its the cinematic look. All you can legitimately ask our miserable projectosr ito not add to the smear and blur because of slow panel speed. Things are getting beteer inlcd land here but perfection is not possible with that technology.


There is so much more to this but it is pretty much a waste of time given the few people here and two months from now the same subject and stupid postsd like mine appearing again.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 63
1/16/13 at 5:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

We seem to be talking, actually I won't lower myself into a we here smile.gif, about a variety of different motion artificacts, most of which are simply reproduction of the source and the way it was shot and then blaming what you accurately see on the projector manufacturer.

Rather then attempting to discuss this, let me just say things like FPS shot (normally 24), focal length, SHUTTER speed, speed of the object being shot, distance from the object of the camera which is of course related to the focal length, whether the moving object is being panned in that the lens is kept on the object as best as posssible, whether the object is stationary and the camera is being panned, the technoloy of the display panel.

Motion blur caused by the panel, a contouring and a smearing has gotten better in lcd land, never a problem in DLP land.

Motion handling doesn't deal with this problem. Motion handling deals with source limitations. nothing to do with the method of projection or display essentially. We can add more frames by computer generation and thenm that depends on how powerful the computer is (built into the projector) and the quality of the algs. We can add black frames to help our brains process and not blur things as much. Avery very complex subject and much more of a problem for video than film before it ios inherent in film. Video has different aspects and often shows continuous motion. Sportds. You want to be as it would be if you were there. No blur.

In films, you want blur, you want judder, you want flicker. You want our miserable projectors to reproduce the source and its crappy 24 fps accurately. Its the cinematic look. All you can legitimately ask our miserable projectosr ito not add to the smear and blur because of slow panel speed. Things are getting beteer inlcd land here but perfection is not possible with that technology.


There is so much more to this but it is pretty much a waste of time given the few people here and two months from now the same subject and stupid postsd like mine appearing again.

When I get a new projector (I've been going through about 1 every two months now with only a couple I've kept) I usually play the same 10-20 movie scenes on each of them after firing it up for the first time. These scenes I've watched for what feel like a million times now. I know how they look on good DLP system where motion typically looks how it should, ie not introducing any major motion artifacts. While I have not seen a JVC model past the RS40/X3 I can tell you without a doubt there is motion smearing ADDED to scene due to these projectors (RS40 and older models). They're motion artifacts not inherent to the source. It is good to hear that new JVCs are doing better in that regard. I'll have to see for myself.

While almost all films today are still shot at 24fps, most cinematographers are aware of the limitation to that frame rate and shoot around those limitations. I went to see The Hobbit on opening weekend and the showing was regular old 2D and 24fps. You could tell MANY times that a scene just didn't look right and that pans were way too fast and there was tons of smearing and some minor judder here and there. It was plainly obvious that the scenes would have been shot differently had the film been captured at 24fps. From my perspective, and from what I've seen, most cinematographers have enough experience to limit the amount of blur and other motion issues to a minimum. They don't just hope for the best and start filming. The cinematographer and director have a well thought out plan on how to shoot the scene. It almost feels like these older JVC models add more motion artifacts to the image than what is natively there in the source material and that is why it bothers me so much. Maybe I'm exaggerating but it almost looks that way to me.

Yes, there will be other threads like this and now that some are saying the newest models handle motion better I'll try my hardest not to crap on them as much for it. tongue.gif With that being said I still want to see for my own eyes.
Edited by Seegs108 - 1/16/13 at 5:35am
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 63
1/16/13 at 5:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post


I can see RBE, including the 11S2 @ 6x that a friend of mine owns. Not everyone is this sensitive, but I am and it's a been a deal-breaker for me to own a single chip DLP as a primary 2D display.

Never heard of RGB_LED DLPs ? smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 63
1/16/13 at 5:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qualunquemente View Post

Never heard of RGB_LED DLPs ? smile.gif

I'll make a deal with Zombie. He can see my LED single chip projector if he lets me see his JVC RS55 biggrin.gif

These newer JVCs have piqued my interest in regards to motion and the sharpness on his particular unit looks excellent too.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 63
1/16/13 at 10:03am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Gleave View Post

I think Wes is saying he is bothered by native motion on his JVC.
The question is regarding specific scene's with bad motion to test on the Sony 50. Is this correct Wes?
I personally do not like the soap opera effect brought on by Sony's motion flow.

That is correct. I was wondering if there were particular scenes in movies ever discussed that bother some more than others. it really bothers me. almost like I'm slowly blinking my eyes while watching.

I ordered a 50 from Mike with AVS last night. Great guy but between him and Mark Seaton they are taking all of my money. Can't wait for my 3 Cat 12's to arrive!
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 63
1/16/13 at 10:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qualunquemente View Post

Never heard of RGB_LED DLPs ? smile.gif

of course. Are you making a statement that it's impossible to see RBE on an LED single chip projector? There's been a number of conversations on this topic already and some claim to still see RBE even on the expensive LED models.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 63
1/16/13 at 11:23am
There's no color wheel.

Jeremy
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 63
1/16/13 at 11:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agrsiv95 View Post

There's no color wheel.

Jeremy

that doesn't matter, there is still a refresh rate of the LEDs. My inexpensive LED DLP's have very noticeable RBE. I'd hope I wouldn't see it on a $15,000 projector. Some claim they can still see it even on the expensive LED's.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 63
1/16/13 at 12:24pm
I understand as I've seen them on even the best single chip dlps as well. I have yet to see them on the Q750i but haven't gone out of my way to either. Is there a specific clip you use?
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 63
1/16/13 at 3:50pm
The first 10 minutes of Underworld Evolution in an RBE torture test, especially with my HP screen which is quite bright @ 2.8 gain.

This scene has high contrast between light and dark with some fast motion that can bring out the RBE even on the 6X DLP's i've seen.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 63
1/16/13 at 4:41pm
I also have the HP 2.8. I will have to try it and see. One review said shaking your head can get them to show still so I guess their there.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 63
1/17/13 at 1:37am
Of course its still there. Its a one chip machine with a color wheel. It will always be there. The only issue is whether you can see it. But its still there. It will always be there. But shake your head violently from side to side, be careful not to hurt hurt yourself and I disclaim any responsibility if you do hurt hurt yourself, you have been warned, and you will probably see RBE. Better yet there are certain test signals which would make RBE visable to even a blind person. Sony used them at shows to show advertise against reap projection single DLP machines.

So what does this mean. Once you see RBE and convince yourself that its there even though you can't normally see it, return your machine and switch to a different technology machine. You may then see other beastly errors such as miscinvergence but WTF, you won't have invisable to your eyes RBE. smile.gif Message, unless you see RBE when watching content, don't worry about it. Enjoy.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › motion flow test scenes?