AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Who cares about 4K? I want local dimming based projectors!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Who cares about 4K? I want local dimming based projectors! - Page 2

post #31 of 85
2/12/13 at 12:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by opv View Post

The number of areas in the local dimming light source can be much smaller than the panel resolution.

I failed to fully flesh out my point; I believe the local dimming in flat panels is applied to the light source, so you could also call it local illumination, which does not exist for pj chips.

Local dimming could be applied, but that's the 4th modulator chip solution that's so expensive to implement, at least so far.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #32 of 85
2/12/13 at 3:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

None of this is going to happen in the foreseeable future. Its not like large masses purchase projectors and those that do don't say take it back, the black's suck. In commercial theaters nobody bitches about the blacks and those that have such an animal for their house just order it up with a special iris plate to cut down the light while improving the blacks. It simply is not going to happen. So be happy that 4K will come with its resolution not related other improvements.

I feel a need to clarify my statement regarding RGB Laser DLP in the consumer space... I'm hoping for it in the same way I'm 'hoping' to win the lottery. and I give myself only slighter better odds at owning a laser dlp in the next 5 yrs (owing mostly to the low probability of winning the lottery when one does not actually purchase a ticket).
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 85
2/12/13 at 5:27pm
With BD screen there is no need for local dimming. Its that good!
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 85
2/12/13 at 11:32pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDH View Post

With BD screen there is no need for local dimming. Its that good!
I totaly disagree.
A BD screen is a good compromise for a room without perfect light control.
In A bat cave room, a white screen like ST100 gives a much better picture.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 85
2/12/13 at 11:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by opv View Post

I totaly disagree.
A BD screen is a good compromise for a room without perfect light control.
In A bat cave room, a white screen like ST100 gives a much better picture.

For sure. BD screens have their weaknesses. Notably a sheen, sparkles, bad color shift, and screen texture. With a material like ST100 (or SnoMatte 100) or the JKP Affinity materials you don't get any of those side affects.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 85
2/12/13 at 11:44pm
I don´t think the BD screens is any good if you want a good screen with many of the same features a DNP Supernova 08-85 is a much better choise ( I have tested both in my batcave), but in a batcave a neutral white screen is a much better choise.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 85
2/13/13 at 12:42am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dougri View Post

In theory... I think the result would be less than anticipated though. I do most of my TV viewing on an LG 55LHX... fantastic picture, backlit led local dimming with 240 zones. Even though the 55LHX has an excellent implementation of zones, I find the zones to be clearly visible if I stand closer than ~8ft (viewing dist of 2 screen widths) due to spill into areas intended to be dark. Now, those zones are ~5.4sqin. So, I would consider 240 zones to be too few for projection with typical viewing distance between 1-1.8 screen widths. And that is best case. Lets assume that the same 8ft viewing of 5.4 sqin zones is 'acceptable'. Now consider 1x viewing distance with an 8ft wide screen and the same 8ft viewing distance... Now we're over 900 zones. Sure, a lot less than 2M, but not just a few. Might be doable. Me? I'm hoping RGB laser DLP works its way into the consumer marketplace.
dougri,
The projector light source is much smaller than the back light panel of an LCD.
For that reason, you don't see in projectors artifacts like clouding or light leakage that you see in LCD displays.
I think that in a similar way, local dimming in projectors are less likely to suffer from artifacts you describe from you local dimming LCD TV, even with a smaller number of local dimming zones.
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 85
2/13/13 at 4:44am
Now I understand what the Bible means when it says that so and so's vision became dim, or shall I say someone's eye sight has become dim.
The younger folks won't know what I am talking about until they get older.
For some or most people their eye sight becomes imparied around the 40s age bracket.
I know, it sucks.
I pray before I can enjoy any better display techknowlegy is that God would heal my eye sight and yes I have already seen a eye doctor and everything is fine, no eye dieses only the effects from old age and the doctor said there is nothing I can do about it except weare eye glasses.
When I was younger my vision was fine but when I got in my early to late 40s my close vision is not as clear as it once was.
Perhaps in some strange irony in new techknowlgy in about 10 years for TVs or projectors that by the same token would be a cure or help with people's vision and eye sight.
Can't enjoy this new and great display techknowlegy if your eye sight is bad.
Anyone here with good eye sight now ? thank the good lord for it. our vison is a gift from God.
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 85
2/13/13 at 5:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

For sure. BD screens have their weaknesses. Notably a sheen, sparkles, bad color shift, and screen texture. With a material like ST100 (or SnoMatte 100) or the JKP Affinity materials you don't get any of those side affects.

As an owner of a 115 ze I would disagree. I have white screens . They just do not have the pop of the bd. There is almost no color shift. Its not even enough to notice. Im very pickey here. at 14 ft you see no sparkles at 10 ft yea thats too close. The ONLY downside that I see is a limited vewing angle. If setting at the edge of either side then no problem but moving at large angles then it drops off on the other side. Much like an lcd tv. I see no color shifting as with lcd though. Turn on light and forget about a white screen. I would never again watch a white screen. It is just an overall dullness to the image where the bd gives a plasma look to the image.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 85
2/13/13 at 6:55am
I would like to hear from the renter of a screen rather than an owner.

The BD is designed to do a job and it does it well. But it isn't a reference quality screen for a reference quality room and it won't give you the realism of a ST100 or JKP .9 or 1.1.

Pop is pop. But if you like more pop and chose a screen based on that characteristic whatever that should mean. Brighter?

Many will prefer a screen with gain over one that doesn't have any gain. Brighter is better for many and becomes the single most important factor. And I wish my ST100 screen was brighter too but I through my many years have gained screen sophistication or appreciation for screen qualities than gain or picture brightness. And some of it is something that is not quantifiable because I don' know the applicable correlation to gain that quality.

The simpliest test for me is when you are watching can you see the screen surface or better yet are you aware that you watching on a screen. Speak up. Yes. Anyone who has a BD 1.4 or so will know they are watching on a BD. Its OK.

Its a good screen. But it won't have the realism or say transparency of the other screns I mentioned.
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 85
2/13/13 at 7:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by opv View Post

dougri,
The projector light source is much smaller than the back light panel of an LCD.
For that reason, you don't see in projectors artifacts like clouding or light leakage that you see in LCD displays.
I think that in a similar way, local dimming in projectors are less likely to suffer from artifacts you describe from you local dimming LCD TV, even with a smaller number of local dimming zones.
I may be speculating, but to state otherwise for LD for projectors is also speculation. Exactly how would dimming of the light source at any resolution less than full display resolution NOT change the luminance of unintended pixels (unless for something artificial like an ANSI contrast pattern with the same layout as the dimming 'zones')?
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 85
2/13/13 at 8:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDH View Post

As an owner of a 115 ze I would disagree. I have white screens . They just do not have the pop of the bd. There is almost no color shift. Its not even enough to notice. Im very pickey here. at 14 ft you see no sparkles at 10 ft yea thats too close. The ONLY downside that I see is a limited vewing angle. If setting at the edge of either side then no problem but moving at large angles then it drops off on the other side. Much like an lcd tv. I see no color shifting as with lcd though. Turn on light and forget about a white screen. I would never again watch a white screen. It is just an overall dullness to the image where the bd gives a plasma look to the image.

You can't generalize about screens that way. It's always a combination of the projector brightness/contrast/room so it makes no sense to say a BD screen "looks more plasma like."

If you take the .8 gain BD screen material, that is quite hard to light up at anything beyond a 100" 16:9 size for most affordable/good quality projectors - e.g. the type most of us on AVS buy. I've seen it many, many times with a whole variety of projectors and, while it holds contrast well under challenging conditions, the image is typically much dimmer than I see in other projection set ups. (That's one reason why Screen Innovations tended to use smaller-than-100' screens for their reviewers and demos). The image I get on my Stewart ST-130 1.3 gain material in a light controlled room (JVC projector) is WAY more vivid, contrasty and punchy even at beyond 100" image sizes than any projector I've seen on the BD .8 reference material. And to my eyes much more plasma-like in terms of wide viewing angles, screen material disappearing, and lack of hot-spotting.

If you use the 1.4 material, yes you get a brighter image than the .8 material, but given the hot-spotting that doesn't carry over the whole screen so the average illumination is less than the 1.4 spec of the screen. I've seen that screen material in action numerous times as well, including with the same JVC projector I owned, and it looks nice, but I still got a punchier image at home with a full white screen, and easily looked like as much or more contrast (I have a very non-reflective room). Plus, again, less hotspotting, wider viewing angle, much less obvious screen texture (I see the screen texture very easily on the BD 1.4 screen at any reasonable viewing distance).

Further, even when it comes to wanting some lights on with a white screen, if you place your lighting sensibly you can have light over the portion of the room where you actually need it, and not aiming at your screen. In my case I can put the lights well up over the seating area with minimal effects on picture quality. See these photos:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2310#post_20473898

Of course you will always get the best quality with lights fully off, but that will be the case with any screen, BD screens included.

The BD screen is a terrific product for it's intended use - preserving contrast in challenging conditions. But there have unfortunately been a lot of misleading comments and claims related to that screen material.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 85
2/13/13 at 8:51am
As to the OP,

This thread actually beat me to it. I was thinking of making a somewhat similar thread, having to do with "Flat Panel Contrast Envy." It's amazing watching the contrast numbers of flat panels go up and up, and especially with technologies like OLED screens on the horizon, we are talking about a combination of brightness, intra-scene contrast and full field contrast that projection can only dream about. I know that by specs some projectors, like my JVC RS55, have better on/off contrastthan a number of flat panels. But by eye, under typical viewing scenarios for each technology, boy do the flat panels seem to pull ahead. Blacks look super black, contrast looks incredible. I happen to have a 2 year old Samsung LCD TV in the basement...good model...and when I turned the lights completely off yes I could see it's black level was a bit higher than my projector. But under normal lighting conditions in the basement, the vividness of the contrast is amazing. Further, I have sat there amazed at the contrast of a Stevie Wonder concert Blu-Ray on my projection set up. But then I took it to my old Panasonic ED resolution plasma - which was rated at 3,000:1 contrast when it came out in 2001 - and the damned images looked even more amazing in terms of the vividness of the contrast! On one of the first gen plasmas!

So I have wondered for quite a while just how high we can get our hopes for projection contrast...or whether we can expect the distance between flat panel and projection contrast to become ever more distanced.

Some in the thread have been fairly pessimistic about projection never being able to come close, at least in terms of ANSI-type paremeters, pointing to room effects as a major issue.

But in principle it seems to me significant advances could be made via the COMBINATION of advances in screen material and projection. For instance, if we can get very bright projectors with high contrast at some point, and use them with screens employing very dark material, then room reflections could be vastly reduced. Imagine something like the Black Diamond .8 gain screen material, which looks charcoal black/gray. That very dark substrate is used to absorb light reflecting back to the screen, but they have to add serious gain coating to raise the brightness of the image to an acceptable level at the viewing angle. But if you had a bright enough projector (with good contrast) you could perhaps skip the gain, get an acceptably bright image, while room reflections would be considerably lowered over any screen/projector combination we have today, allowing for preservation of higher contrast/ansi. Like..I dunno...how bright can laser projectors get in the future?

Thoughts?
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 85
2/13/13 at 9:21am
I believe the screen is the key to breaking the ANSI barrier. Only an active screen can boost ANSI beyond 1000:1. It needs to have some spectral and time domain control and needs to be synchronized to projector real-time. This way it will only reflect what is currently projecting and absorb any reflections.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 85
2/13/13 at 9:29am
I agree with you Rich. I think sometimes many here on this forum focus more on measure values and technical talk moreso than what is actually seen on screen. My JVC RS45 had a deeper black level than my Pioneer Kuro plasma (or the Sharp LCD that i just bought) in darkened scenes however in other areas the picture does look better on the flat panels. Even the new Sharp LCD has blueish blacks in the letterbox or side bars but in a darkened room but if you just watch the content on screen the black levels are a bit darker than what I see with my JVC or Sony HW50.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 85
2/13/13 at 12:05pm
Local dimming is crap. Unless it will dim locally every single pixel. So yes, this can be achieved either with active screen or with two chips in series, like in Carl Zeiss Velvet.

There's another alternative - using blackest light-absorbing materials as a base behind the mirrors of DLP chip. It can be made of graphene. Today it is still expensive as hell.

http://physics.aps.org/articles/v5/12
Quote:
The researchers calculate that an array of such dots can absorb 100 percent of the light energy hitting it, as long as the light frequency matches the plasmon frequency. The theory predicts a similar effect for any array of sufficiently strong oscillators, such as metallic nanoparticles, not just graphene, García de Abajo says.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 85
2/13/13 at 12:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLPProjectorfan View Post

...no eye dieses only the effects from old age and the doctor said there is nothing I can do about it except weare eye glasses.

Somebody needs to tell him about LASIK.
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

...I happen to have a 2 year old Samsung LCD TV in the basement...good model...and when I turned the lights completely off yes I could see it's black level was a bit higher than my projector. But under normal lighting conditions in the basement, the vividness of the contrast is amazing.

This reminds of a time I was in a movie theater before the feature started, and was amazed at the apparent contrast of commercials with lights on.

Then I noticed that there was little illumination at the front and that spots were shining down a bit forward of me in the middle, and that the lamps had a direct path to my eyes.

The point being that to achieve the same effect you need another light source to close your iris' down.

Maybe backlighting or LED spots pointed at your eyes but away from the screen.

Of course there goes the invisibility of the room, but that's the same deal as the other scenarios you mentioned.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 85
2/13/13 at 2:31pm
I did ask the eye doctor about LASIK after they did the eye exam they told me it won't help me in my situation.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 85
2/13/13 at 4:02pm
You might want to read the over 65 thread I started in the Calibration forum a few weeks ago.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 85
2/13/13 at 5:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

You might want to read the over 65 thread I started in the Calibration forum a few weeks ago.


Tx for the headsup, Mark; very relevant as b-day #72 comes up in a month.

 

My short take is to calibrate to the absolute standards, so that the pic I see on the pj is what I see in real life.

Reply
Reply
post #51 of 85
2/13/13 at 6:50pm
I'd rather have the colors right some of the time rather than wrong all the time. I can make them more right by compensating my calibration until I get the second catarac replacement in say a year and then I will calibrate to the standard having them right in real life and when watching matching my display even knowing because of he limited colorspace of rec 709 vs real life many colors moved to within the rec 709 standard are not as they would be in real life. Of course they change in real life too because 6500 degree conditions are only present part of the time.

The pro calibratosr for the most part (not UMR) have a self interest in calibrating the display with their equipment to the rec 709 standard and be damned in compensating for my one yellow filtered eye now. They throw their hands up saying woe is me, what are they supposed to do?
they won't answer my challenge. Specifically what does the average customer want. To calibrate the display to the standards knowing their eyes have a problem or wanting to make the colors look like the Director and colorist wanted them to.

To me there are two reasons an old fart like me gets cateract replacements, to see more sharpley and to get rid of the yellow filtration (severe) cause by old age.

If you want to see everything throuigh rose (whoops) yellowed colored glasses including when watching your display that's your preference. not mine.
Edited by mark haflich - 2/13/13 at 9:10pm
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 85
2/13/13 at 11:48pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post


So I have wondered for quite a while just how high we can get our hopes for projection contrast...or whether we can expect the distance between flat panel and projection contrast to become ever more distanced.

Some in the thread have been fairly pessimistic about projection never being able to come close, at least in terms of ANSI-type paremeters, pointing to room effects as a major issue.

But in principle it seems to me significant advances could be made via the COMBINATION of advances in screen material and projection. For instance, if we can get very bright projectors with high contrast at some point, and use them with screens employing very dark material, then room reflections could be vastly reduced. Imagine something like the Black Diamond .8 gain screen material, which looks charcoal black/gray. That very dark substrate is used to absorb light reflecting back to the screen, but they have to add serious gain coating to raise the brightness of the image to an acceptable level at the viewing angle. But if you had a bright enough projector (with good contrast) you could perhaps skip the gain, get an acceptably bright image, while room reflections would be considerably lowered over any screen/projector combination we have today, allowing for preservation of higher contrast/ansi. Like..I dunno...how bright can laser projectors get in the future?

Thoughts?
The option of projecting on a black/dark gray screen with a very bright projector has been tested before:
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cine4home.de%2FSpecials%2FTageslichtprojektion%2FBlackScreen.htm&sl=de&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Such a setup improves the black levels of the projected image in a non optimal room. It will not, however, improve the ansi contrast in an optimal bat cave environment.
In a bat cave room, there is no ambient light and the only light leakage is due to the light from the projected image bouncing to the walls and back to the screen.
This is a linear reflections system and if you use a projector that is brighter by a factor of X to compensate the dark screen, the reflections will also be X time brighter. The ansi contrast ratio will remain exactly the same.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 85
2/14/13 at 6:12am
The on off will be constant and is independent of room reflections off the screen and bouncing back on. The ANSI contrast is highly dependent on screen room reflections. This has been discussed many times and I suggest doing a little research on the forum about this. Try Darin's article in Secrets of Home theater about 6 years ago. I am not going to engage further on this.
Edited by mark haflich - 2/14/13 at 7:47am
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 85
2/14/13 at 6:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by opv View Post

The option of projecting on a black/dark gray screen with a very bright projector has been tested before:
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cine4home.de%2FSpecials%2FTageslichtprojektion%2FBlackScreen.htm&sl=de&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8[/quote]

Yes, which is essentially a higher lumen version of what you get using specialty screens like the Black Diamond screens. That link essentially makes the point I was talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opv View Post

Such a setup improves the black levels of the projected image in a non optimal room.

Also significantly preserves ANSI contrast. The issue is that if we had a projector with significantly higher contrast and higher ansi contrast, most people point to the room interactions as limiting factors
in realising such potential. A darker substrate helps preserve ansi contrast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opv View Post

It will not, however, improve the ansi contrast in an optimal bat cave environment.
In a bat cave room, there is no ambient light and the only light leakage is due to the light from the projected image bouncing to the walls and back to the screen.
This is a linear reflections system and if you use a projector that is brighter by a factor of X to compensate the dark screen, the reflections will also be X time brighter. The ansi contrast ratio will remain exactly the same.

I believe that is erroneous. First, the error should be obvious if you realize that in your "optimal" bat cave, you are still positing it to have the problem of light bouncing to walls and back to the screen. In other words, the bat cave you are proposing is sub-optimal in exactly the same way a non-bat cave (that is lighter walled) room is sub-optimal. We are talking about reducing room reflection effects. (And forget ambient light for the moment, that's easy to control). Hence the difference between a lighter and darker screen material would still apply.

The reflection system is not linear given we are talking about the difference between using a very dark gray substrate screen vs a white screen given the same image brightness on each. .
In which case the light reflections back to the darker gray screen will be reflected at a lower level ( "absorbed"), hence preserve ansi/intrascene contrast better. (That is after all why gray paint appears darker than white paint to our eyes). This is already a known phenomenon which is why gray screens have been used for just this purpose. So long as we are talking about the pollution of room reflections back to the screen, the physics don't change - whether you are talking a white room or a room with very dark walls the darker your screen material, the darker it will make the reflected light.

If we actually have an "ideal" bat cave with zero reflection back to the screen, it seems to me that a darker screen material would be moot and it would be all up to the projector technology alone to increase contrast. And I'm also wondering what it is about projector technology that limits it's inherent contrast (especially ansi type contrast) at this point. I'm sure controlling stray light in the optical paths and boards must be much of the issue.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 85
2/14/13 at 7:16am
Thread Starter 
R Harkness,
Let's see if I understand your point, by using a simple example.
Let's assume we use a projector that doesn't limit the ansi-contrast at all. so when you project an ansi contrast pattern, it doesn't output any light over the black squares.

I denote the projector light density as P_L, and the screen gain as S_G.
The density of the white squares on the screen is proportional to : White = P_L*S_G

The white image bounces to the wall and back to the screen. Denote the "gain" of the wall as W_G.

The light leakage on the screen, which is eventually the amount of light on the "black" square on the screen is : Black = White*W_G*S_G

And the ansi contrast limit is given by White/Black =1/(W_G*S_G)

So according to this simple example, the lower the screen gain, the better for ansi contrast.

Did I get it right?
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 85
2/14/13 at 9:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLPProjectorfan View Post

Now I understand what the Bible means when it says that so and so's vision became dim, or shall I say someone's eye sight has become dim.
The younger folks won't know what I am talking about until they get older.
For some or most people their eye sight becomes imparied around the 40s age bracket.
I know, it sucks.
I pray before I can enjoy any better display techknowlegy is that God would heal my eye sight and yes I have already seen a eye doctor and everything is fine, no eye dieses only the effects from old age and the doctor said there is nothing I can do about it except weare eye glasses.
When I was younger my vision was fine but when I got in my early to late 40s my close vision is not as clear as it once was.
Perhaps in some strange irony in new techknowlgy in about 10 years for TVs or projectors that by the same token would be a cure or help with people's vision and eye sight.
Can't enjoy this new and great display techknowlegy if your eye sight is bad.
Anyone here with good eye sight now ? thank the good lord for it. our vison is a gift from God.

The cost common reason for one's vision becoming "dim" is most likely the result of cataracts. When you have cataract surgery a new intraocular lens is inserted within the eye, replacing the natural one. The new lens can be used to also correct other vision issues. I had cataract surgery 2 years ago (at age 62) and I now have better vision than anytime in the past 30 years, except for close-up vision, which was perhaps a little better 30 years ago.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 85
2/14/13 at 9:42am
Hi Ron. As a predictable result of detached retina surgery, myu right eye had accelerated cataract development sharpness wise and I had it removed (the cataract) and a new lens inserted a few weeks ago. At this point the eye is much sharper and I suspect around 20/30. No complaint. However compared to my left eye which is still sharp, the new lens has shown me how much my eyes and their cataracts had yellowed over the years. There is a dramatic difference in ther colors each eye sees now with the left yellow distrting the colors significantly because of it having a strong yellow filter in it (the cataract) What I see with both eyes combining in my processor (my brain) I see distorted colors. Sort of halfway between the correct colors seen by my right eye with its essentially clear lens and the heavily filtering of the left eye.

Because the left eye except for the yellow filtrationhas good sharp vision my eye surgeon does not want to remove the cataract and replace it with a new lens. This is because of the risk of blindness associated with any cataract removal and replacement with a lens. However diagnosises exist which could be used to justify assumption of the risks but in truth I can't say that masking such a diagnosis (such as the color mismatch is driving me crazy etc, which it isn't, cause I am already crazy smile.gif )would indeed be justified. because my right eye provides a reference to me, I can judge quality and somewhat quantitatively how much the colors seen combined by both eyes and my brain are of.

White is somewhat yellow and I simply cranked in blue gain from my calibrated display to maske the whites look the same as they are seen by my right eye on the calibrated display befiore cranking in extra blue. i will need to deal with red next but frankly fixing the white makes things look reasonably OK.

This whole experience has made me think quite about why calibrate. The root of calibration targets is based on an IEE deinition of amythical standard observer. defined in 1931 and modified a little recently i effect by an amendment for color shading.

The question I ask is what does someone having a HT want. Having their display calibrated to meet some standard or as I suspect to be able to see the colors intended by the Director and the colorist.

Most HT folks will assune their eyes do not cause the colors to be seen incorrectly from the artists intent. That is what the calibrator pros (at least most of them, UMR being an exception) would like to have you believe or in the alternative saying its only the job to make the display the same within the displays limits as a calibrated display. They simply do not have the tools to make it otherwise.

Until I get a new lens in my right eye, to me the calibration model is broken. and all viewers should know that once they reach age 60 or so, the yellowing of their forming cataracts will cause then ti see colors incorrectly despite .calibrating their displays to the rec 709 standard. The calibrators answer is its the best they can do and you will get used to it. The devdlopment of the yellowing is slow and I suspect for many years I have seen colors incorrectly but didn't know it.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 85
2/14/13 at 10:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Hi Ron. As a predictable result of detached retina surgery, myu right eye had accelerated cataract development sharpness wise and I had it removed (the cataract) and a new lens inserted a few weeks ago. At this point the eye is much sharper and I suspect around 20/30. No complaint. However compared to my left eye which is still sharp, the new lens has shown me how much my eyes and their cataracts had yellowed over the years. There is a dramatic difference in ther colors each eye sees now with the left yellow distrting the colors significantly because of it having a strong yellow filter in it (the cataract) What I see with both eyes combining in my processor (my brain) I see distorted colors. Sort of halfway between the correct colors seen by my right eye with its essentially clear lens and the heavily filtering of the left eye.

Because the left eye except for the yellow filtrationhas good sharp vision my eye surgeon does not want to remove the cataract and replace it with a new lens. This is because of the risk of blindness associated with any cataract removal and replacement with a lens. However diagnosises exist which could be used to justify assumption of the risks but in truth I can't say that masking such a diagnosis (such as the color mismatch is driving me crazy etc, which it isn't, cause I am already crazy smile.gif )would indeed be justified. because my right eye provides a reference to me, I can judge quality and somewhat quantitatively how much the colors seen combined by both eyes and my brain are of.

White is somewhat yellow and I simply cranked in blue gain from my calibrated display to maske the whites look the same as they are seen by my right eye on the calibrated display befiore cranking in extra blue. i will need to deal with red next but frankly fixing the white makes things look reasonably OK.

This whole experience has made me think quite about why calibrate. The root of calibration targets is based on an IEE deinition of amythical standard observer. defined in 1931 and modified a little recently i effect by an amendment for color shading.

The question I ask is what does someone having a HT want. Having their display calibrated to meet some standard or as I suspect to be able to see the colors intended by the Director and the colorist.

Most HT folks will assune their eyes do not cause the colors to be seen incorrectly from the artists intent. That is what the calibrator pros (at least most of them, UMR being an exception) would like to have you believe or in the alternative saying its only the job to make the display the same within the displays limits as a calibrated display. They simply do not have the tools to make it otherwise.

Until I get a new lens in my right eye, to me the calibration model is broken. and all viewers should know that once they reach age 60 or so, the yellowing of their forming cataracts will cause then ti see colors incorrectly despite .calibrating their displays to the rec 709 standard. The calibrators answer is its the best they can do and you will get used to it. The devdlopment of the yellowing is slow and I suspect for many years I have seen colors incorrectly but didn't know it.

Mark - I had surgery in both eyes one week apart. The most marked change after surgery is how much whiter and brighter everything appeared. Since the yellowing of the natural lens occured slowly over time I simply didn't realize just how much the colors had changed until I had the surgery. Since you only had surgery on one eye, I can understand how this would create an issue with a color shift from one eye to the other.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 85
2/14/13 at 10:16am

Again, Mark, I would say that the goal of calibrating one's display is to see a projected image exactly as one sees the real world (the over used 'looking out the window' description).     If ones eyes have deteriorated, then one's view of the real world changes, and so does the way one sees a projected image.     If one tries to calibrate to take account of imperfect vision, then looking at the projected image will not look like looking at the real world.

Reply
Reply
post #60 of 85
2/14/13 at 10:50am
Your thesis breaks down. because a calibrated display gives your the colors you would see under d65 lighting conditionsand then they are only the colors you would see within the rec 709 color space.

Once again what does the HT expect as a result of the calibration. To see the colors as the artistic production chain intended, not to have the colors look wrong if they were viewed ubdr d65 conditions in real life. Wrong is wrong. And I don't see ant benefit to have them the same wrong in two environent than different wrongs. I would rather have them correct in the display environment if they could be so made.

As I now see it, pardon the pun, the only benefit is to equalize displays, in many situations important, but not really to a single HT display. There, the goal should be to let the viewer see it or them as the artistic chain intended. You are trying validate something which in viewer reality is flawed.

i await your response which I truly respect.

Your friend.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Who cares about 4K? I want local dimming based projectors!