or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › F8500 Recommended Settings Thread.....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

F8500 Recommended Settings Thread..... - Page 15

post #421 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Would you happy to know how many ftl drop with each cell click from 16 (with contrast at 90)? I was estimating 2-3 per click.

That is a good question David. I'd be interested to know this too. I find 16/90 works pretty well for me in the day/evening lighted room but reduce to 12-13/90 for dark room viewing and am curious what the light output at those settings might be. Maybe next time pie has his meter out he could check this for us.
post #422 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Would you happy to know how many ftl drop with each cell click from 16 (with contrast at 90)? I was estimating 2-3 per click.

It's not linear over the full range but in the 10 to 15 Cell setting range it is about 2 ftL per click.

Larry
post #423 of 2077
I've just been having a chat with another member who believes cell should always be 20 on the F8500 because 'Samsung says so....' He has calibrated to 35fL and gone down to a low contrast and a jiggered 10p

I tried to explain but I don't think I got through...
post #424 of 2077
Interesting here is the VE cal for the 8500 from the shootout. Notice the exact same peak at 90 gamma that I have.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/969343_10151471902468445_2005771863_n.jpg
post #425 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by pieandchips View Post

I've just been having a chat with another member who believes cell should always be 20 on the F8500 because 'Samsung says so....' He has calibrated to 35fL and gone down to a low contrast and a jiggered 10p

I tried to explain but I don't think I got through...

You got through just fine, you're just still misunderstanding (and misquoting) me. I did say that Samsung engineers have recommended keeping cell light at 20 because it is the plasma's purest condition (you can find plenty of confirmation on that on these and other professional HDTV forums), but I never said you should always keep it there. What I said is you will have a difference in aesthetic presentation with cell 20 and lower contrast than at high contrast and lower cell light even with all else (fl, gamut, gamma, greyscale) being equal and accurate to rec 709. Rec 709 is about reproducing a standard to give you the most representative qualities of the content, but the way you present that accurate content then becomes a matter of preference mostly, for your room and eyes. Preference determined by adjusting the way light comes through that greyscale. Contrast/brightness (really contrast and brightness just follows along), along with cell light (and gamma but assuming that was set from the start), are those adjustments if light. You can play with combinations of those until your eyeballs burn out, all the time keeping greyscale and gamut accurate and still every combination will be a different look to your picture. Percieved depth, richness of color, detail clarity, reflections (in content), intensity of the sun shining through the clouds, etc, will all change depending on light (just like in real life! Go figure. ;-)) Just like going to digital IMAX or standard theater, it's not that the movie was adjusted just the presentation of it.

So my point is that I prefer a bit softer, more cinematic presentation of lower contrast and higher cell light, you obviously prefer the more poppy depth of your settings. Neither is wrong. Although I still stand by my comments regarding tweaking of the CMS and the math versus leaving it at auto. :-)

At the end of the day, because I know you're new to calibration and still learning, trust in your equipment and measurements but more so don't forget to trust your eyes. Watch content not just graphs. Too often calibrators get lost in the numbers alone. Get the numbers accurate to 709, then get the presentation accurate to you. ;-)

Edit- My calibrated and preferred settings:

Cell Light 20
Contrast 82
Brightness 48
Sharpness 0
Color 50
Tint G50/R50
Flesh Tone 0
Color Space Auto

White Balance
R-Offset 32
G-Offset 25
B-Offset 28
R-Gain 31
G-Gain 25
B-Gain 29

10p White Balance
#1 -1,-1,0
#2 -3,-1,0
#3 0,0,0
#4 -1,0,2
#5 -1,0,0
#6 -2,0,1
#7 0,0,0
#8 1,0,-2
#9 -8,0,10
#10 5,0,9

Gamma +1
Color Tone Warm2
Digital Clean View Off
MPEG Noise Filter Off
Film Mode Cinema Smooth/Auto 1
Motion Judder Canceller Off
Black Optimizer Dark Room

Eco Sensor Off - Max Cell 20
Edited by Elvamir - 5/27/13 at 7:41pm
post #426 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvamir View Post



At the end of the day, because I know you're new to calibration and still learning, trust in your equipment and measurements but more so don't forget to trust your eyes. Watch content not just graphs. Too often calibrators get lost in the numbers alone. Get the numbers accurate to 709, then get the presentation accurate to you. ;-)

Your recommendation is curious. Get the display accurate but then modify to make it somehow more accurate. Tell me more.....
Edited by buzzard767 - 5/27/13 at 7:58pm
post #427 of 2077
Buzz,

Did you arrive at your home already. If so, did you fly a 767 or drive as fast as one?

Larry
post #428 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryInRI View Post

Buzz,

Did you arrive at your home already. If so, did you fly a 767 or drive as fast as one?

Larry

Same old, same old, 1600 miles in two days. My wife and dog could kill me. I'm ten years retired but the 757/767 speeds I used to do are in my tired ass dreams....
post #429 of 2077
Elvamir,

Thank you for coming to this thread. I did not want to say I was talking to you in case you did not want to be known. smile.gif

I have just tried your settings, and I know 10p won't work very well, but there is certainly less 'detail' compared to my cal.
Auto color is also missing reality for me. The color is 'fake' looking everyone is too pink.

I know this isn't a slagging match or pointy fingers, but seriously, try my cal and see what you think. Play the same material.
Do you have CAL-DAY and NIGHT to play with?

I am 45fL so you may have to adjust for a bit.
Edited by pieandchips - 5/27/13 at 8:07pm
post #430 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzard767 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvamir View Post



At the end of the day, because I know you're new to calibration and still learning, trust in your equipment and measurements but more so don't forget to trust your eyes. Watch content not just graphs. Too often calibrators get lost in the numbers alone. Get the numbers accurate to 709, then get the presentation accurate to you. ;-)

Your recommendation is curious. Get the display accurate but then modify to make it somehow more accurate. Tell me more.....

Ask any professional (real professional) calibrator if they just set the numbers, smile at the charts and then walk away from the TV. I bet the answer is unanimously "no."

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
post #431 of 2077
So, educate me here;

I'm also reading 49fL with your settings Elvamir. How are you getting 35fL with this?

I thought it was bright! smile.gif there's a lot of blue-white going on.

Calman Window 100% white slide.
post #432 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvamir View Post

Ask any professional (real professional) calibrator if they just set the numbers, smile at the charts and then walk away from the TV. I bet the answer is unanimously "no."

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Buzz is a real certified calibrator. smile.gif

Larry
post #433 of 2077
Is it even possible to get 35fL with cell at 20 on the F8500? Perhaps not (?)
post #434 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvamir View Post

Ask any professional (real professional) calibrator if they just set the numbers, smile at the charts and then walk away from the TV. I bet the answer is unanimously "no."

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

What is a "real professional"? Any pro certification course makes content viewing the final step. Calibration goals are definable.

"then get the presentation accurate to you" ---- you didn't answer - what constitutes "more accurate"?
post #435 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by pieandchips View Post

Elvamir,

Thank you for coming to this thread. I did not want to say I was talking to you in case you did not want to be known. smile.gif

I have just tried your settings, and I know 10p won't work very well, but there is certainly less 'detail' compared to my cal.
Auto color is also missing reality for me. The color is 'fake' looking everyone is too pink.

I know this isn't a slagging match or pointy fingers, but seriously, try my cal and see what you think. Play the same material.
Do you have CAL-DAY and NIGHT to play with?

I am 45fL so you may have to adjust for a bit.

I'm with you, not slagging or pointing fingers. Good discussion. :-)

Looking at your settings right now. It may be that the 10p doesn't transfer, I agree there, but yours is extremely green push on my set. Look at black and white content for reference, but it can also be seen in flesh tones or white cross pattern. I think the pink you think you are seeing in flesh may just be the lack of green that you've been looking at. Look at people in real life, more pink than green in their cheeks. ;-) Try different content for awhile and see if you still feel the same, you may just need to get used to it. The greyscale should be clean. The green push I'm seeing with yours is in the greyscale though.

I would disagree about the detail also. Yours is brighter and greater contrast so that "pop" may be what you're mistaking for detail, but if you study some material it's not much different if at all in regards to detail. Again, all of this could be 10p variance between our sets. I could take side by side photos to send you if you want so you don't think I'm crazy. :-P

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
post #436 of 2077
What is green push?
post #437 of 2077
It basically means there's too much green resulting in green looking skin tones and inaccurate color. I'll be receiving my 60" any day now so I will be able to compare Pie's settings vs my calibrated 55LHX.
post #438 of 2077
I think he was having a little joke there smile.gif

Off to bed now will play tomorrow night.
post #439 of 2077
Elvamir can you confirm the fL you were aiming for?
post #440 of 2077
I usually like somewhere between 34-37fl. I can like brighter but then at night when I watch in a fairly dark room, even with bias lighting, it bugs my eyes a bit. With that cal I measured close to 35 if I recall but that was before a small contrast/brightness tweak so its probably a bit higher now.
post #441 of 2077
Morning,

I measured 49fL please let me know your brightness measuring method.

[edit] I used Calman 100% white window. ABL should not have played a significant part (which would have lowered the value anyway).
Edited by pieandchips - 5/28/13 at 6:29am
post #442 of 2077
Also with fresh eyes this morning I did a quick compare between both the calibrations and I do see your reference to green slightly. I turned off CMS and went to auto and it remains. My thoughts are that this is coming from 2point(?) as I kept changes to the values minimal. In my previous cals I was more liberal.

What I do see in yours is the whites are very bright and that's what is making me see blue-white. I think this must be due to just how bright this TV is at cell 20. Even lower contrast and adjusted gamma can't 'balance' this overall brightness.

It is much brighter than mine and mines at 45!

/confused. smile.gif

[edit] My question is for those in the know, where might the slightly green tint in my values be coming from if it's not CMS?
I would love an assist so I can address it! smile.gif
Edited by pieandchips - 5/28/13 at 6:25am
post #443 of 2077
Yea the 100% white on my greyscale cal was so tight the line was black on the chart, lol. Probably best I've ever had it. So white is white, and I'm letting a lot of light through with how I prefer the presentation because it helps detail in the high range and a bit richer colors. Again, my preference, but here are some options to play with if you want to see what presentation is most appealing to you. Lower cell light to 19 and try that, see if you like it better. Alternatively keep cell light but drop both contrast and brightness by one notch each (81/47.) Or try just drop brightness to 47 but keep contrast. I could go back and forth between that and 48, it's a trade off between slightly better detail at 47 and slightly richer colors at 48. Both within spec of Rec 709, it's just brightness is at an interesting place with contrast 82 that gives some room to play. Again, this is all on my set assuming my greyscale settings, which may look slightly different on your set. In any case the greyscale is fairly stable so you can have fun with cell or contrast to get in a place you like, just make sure your brightness setting trails appropriately. Have fun with it, get to that happy presentation place for yourself! :-)
post #444 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by pieandchips View Post

Morning,

I measured 49fL please let me know your brightness measuring method.

[edit] I used Calman 100% white window. ABL should not have played a significant part (which would have lowered the value anyway).

Calman with an i1 pro, when my settings were at 81 contrast 47 brightness measured around 35 if I recall. I'll check the charts and post them when I get home.
post #445 of 2077
Thanks for the tips smile.gif

How are you measuring your brightness to get 35fL?
I cannot duplicate that!
posted same time

And where might the slight green be coming from on my side if it's not CMS?
post #446 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvamir View Post

Calman with an i1 pro, when my settings were at 81 contrast 47 brightness measured around 35 if I recall. I'll check the charts and post them when I get home.

Okay well there's some anomaly there as when I got my meter I tried to get a baseline especially for fL, by measuring a 100% white window with someone else's calibration values who was quoting a 40fL (I cannot remember who at this moment sorry) and I measured 39.5fL which was acceptable, but it did confirm I was doing the correct procedure.

I've used this procedure on your calibration and I measure 49fL.
post #447 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by pieandchips View Post

I would do a test - put in some settings, unplug for at least ten minutes (let the caps dissipate) then plug in again. If it forgets, time to exchange.

Tried unplugging as you suggested. The settings appeared to be intact after plugging it back in. I'm not sure what happened originally to cause them to go away.

I'll have to watch and see if it occurs again.
post #448 of 2077
Quote:
Originally Posted by pieandchips View Post

Thanks for the tips smile.gif

How are you measuring your brightness to get 35fL?
I cannot duplicate that!
posted same time

And where might the slight green be coming from on my side if it's not CMS?

Is there a Pie tweak in the works? wink.gif Have you checked with the new firmware 1104.3 update yet?
post #449 of 2077
Yeah there sure will be. I want to use APL patterns too. May do a whole new one from scratch. I'm still on older FW. In no rush just yet until I've heard what it does wink.gif
post #450 of 2077
surfmlb, and anyone else for that matter, try Elvamir's cal, you may like it smile.gif
It's too bright for me, but the whites certainly are white, almost artificially so, and it has highlighted a deficiency in my cal for slightly too much green.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Plasma Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Plasma Flat Panel Displays › F8500 Recommended Settings Thread.....