or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official Sony [X9] XBR-55X900A / XBR-65X900A Owner's Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Sony [X9] XBR-55X900A / XBR-65X900A Owner's Thread - Page 109

post #3241 of 7316
I get a bit of stutter when watching sports with the motionflow set to on, but it only happens when they wipe to a replay or overlay graphics onto the screen. Whatever mixing system they're using seems to throw off the film/video lock of the motionflow processing, which rights itself after a couple of seconds.

If those TV shows have been sped up as you say, then it would've been done inside the video domain which may also be interfering with the film/video detection, thereby producing that judder. Try watching with motionflow and reality creation both turned off and see what happens. If I do that then the stuttering disappears, though the picture itself then loses temporal resolution in the process. The TV Gods giveth, and the TV Gods taketh away...
post #3242 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiken View Post

Hello fellow owners,

I've had this TV for a month or so now and I've noticed with certain channels/programs that there is a noticeable stutter/judder in some motion-based scenes/content. TNT and FX seem to be particularly bad. The majority of channels behave fine and I've never seen an issue with Blu-Ray/DVD content so it would appear be the content itself. I've tinkered with the motion related settings while the program in question was on, but that almost always made the picture look worse. Is anyone else seeing similar behaviors and if so, had any luck correcting it?

I've got both DirecTV and Comcast for my source providers. (I get a huge discount on my Internet to have basic digital with Comcast and I'm using a TiVo for the tuner so double +!)

I have noticed the same stuttering on FX and TNT that you mentioned on both sources. Other channels are fine. It appears to be something at the origination of their content before it goes to providers such as DirecTV or Comcast. Nothing I do fixes it so I just live with it, or pull out the blu ray! smile.gif

As a side note, I noticed it on my old 32 Samsung and prior to that with my 32 Sony so it has been an ongoing issue for some time.
post #3243 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Using measurement tools, Warm2 is closest to the 6500 color standard, while Warm1 is much cooler (bluer). Nothing wrong with preferring a cooler picture, it's just not as accurate.

6500K is daylight temperature. Get use to Warm 2 and after a while you will see that the colors are accurate. All the studio's and motion pictures are using 6500K as color temperature.
post #3244 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by johanverschuren View Post


6500K is daylight temperature. Get use to Warm 2 and after a while you will see that the colors are accurate. All the studio's and motion pictures are using 6500K as color temperature.

Accurate?

 

 

The only accuracy is the one you like or prefer. 

 

Have you ever looked at some one who is about to throw up because he/she is sea sick? They have this unmistakable greenish yellow tint to their face, just before projectile-gusts of vomit propel out of their insides?

That's what warm 2 reminds me of.

Look at the people on TV, they all look like they are sea sick and about to vomit.

post #3245 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by quovadis123 View Post

Accurate?


The only accuracy is the one you like or prefer. 

Have you ever looked at some one who is about to throw up because he/she is sea sick? They have this unmistakable greenish yellow tint to their face, just before projectile-gusts of vomit propel out of their insides?
That's what warm 2 reminds me of.
Look at the people on TV, they all look like they are sea sick and about to vomit.

Very descriptive, thank you. I stand by what I said earlier. If your set is exhibiting unpleasant colors, you have something wrong with your calibration. Since quite a few others agree that calibrating as close to 6500 as possible yields the most accurate colors (including most, if not all, professional calibrators), you should step back and ask yourself whether you should check your calibration settings.
post #3246 of 7316

I'm watching Pierce Morgan on CNN HD.

 

Warm 2 is turned on, and I promise you he looks like he is about to vomit. He is talking to that other guy who does "Ford commercials", and he too looks like he already has one foot in the grave.

 

Warm 1 they both look a tad pale.

 

Neutral , they look normal to me. Nice rosy cheeks.


Edited by quovadis123 - 10/30/13 at 6:34pm
post #3247 of 7316

In fact, let me explain.

A white background looks white in neutral. It looks very white in cool.

 

With warm 2 and 1, the white looks like it has a yellowish green tint on it.

Warm 2 is much more pronounced than warm 1.

 

You can imagine what people's faces look like with warm 2 turned on...

post #3248 of 7316
Just got the new update. 3.901AAA. Anyone know what it changed?
post #3249 of 7316
Downloading and installing it myself right now. The Sony support web site has no mention of this version yet. We are in uncharted territory....
post #3250 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by quovadis123 View Post

In fact, let me explain.
A white background looks white in neutral. It looks very white in cool.

With warm 2 and 1, the white looks like it has a yellowish green tint on it.
Warm 2 is much more pronounced than warm 1.

You can imagine what people's faces look like with warm 2 turned on...

No one is doubting that you prefer Neutral. There is nothing wrong with that. I still claim it is because your set is not properly calibrated. There is nothing inconsistent about what we both are saying. Do you understand?
post #3251 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post


No one is doubting that you prefer Neutral. There is nothing wrong with that. I still claim it is because your set is not properly calibrated. There is nothing inconsistent about what we both are saying. Do you understand?

I'm using your settings...that's the problem.

Maybe my warm 2 is different?

post #3252 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by quovadis123 View Post
 

I'm using your settings...that's the problem.

Maybe my warm 2 is different?

 

Sharing someone else's settings can be problematic, although I would not characterize my settings as a "problem".  There are differences among panels, although I would not have suspected such a significant difference.  I guarantee that Warm2 on my set is very close to 6500, and that the settings I posted produce a PQ that is no where near what you described.  The colors are very accurate.

 

Perhaps someone else can share what they are experiencing WRT their color settings and PQ?

post #3253 of 7316

I think that it's only a matter of personal preferences..

I like "cold" settings, but I understand that, for the professional standard and accuracy, warm 2 with the right settings is the most accurate choice..

post #3254 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Sharing someone else's settings can be problematic, although I would not characterize my settings as a "problem".  There are differences among panels, although I would not have suspected such a significant difference.  I guarantee that Warm2 on my set is very close to 6500, and that the settings I posted produce a PQ that is no where near what you described.  The colors are very accurate.

Perhaps someone else can share what they are experiencing WRT their color settings and PQ?

I'm using warm 1. Warm 2 is too green/brown and I can't get greyscale dialed in as well. I additionally made fine adjustments in my AVR white balance since the TVs adjustments proved coarse. Every set is different especially in respect to color calibration. Amazingly things like brightness and contrast etc seem to be about the same across these sets.
post #3255 of 7316

I talked with Sony Italy about the "issue" of the 540p resolution with 3D contents. This is what they told me:

 

If we talk about the ability of the screen to present a 3D image, the maximum resolution that comes to the individual viewer's eye is 1080px namely:
3840 x 1080 Left Eye
3840 x 1080 Right Eye
Virtual 3D image - 3840 x 2160
 
Obviously, for this you must have a 4K native 3D content, so if you refer to the resolution of a single image, right or left is 1080.
 
If we start from a content FHD the factors are:
 
1920 x 540 Left Eye
1920 x 540 Right Eye
Virtual 3D image - 1920 x 1080
 
Added to this there is to consider the 4K upscaling 
on the screen. In this case the native resolution of the 3D content is necessarily 540px

 

 

 

 

And about the horizontal lines on the 55":

 

The lines noticed are probably due to the FPR filter in front of this panel, needed for the passive 3D technology

post #3256 of 7316

Could you guys please comment on WARM2?

 

When i watch a news channel like CNN HD or any other channels, peoples faces look slightly yellow/green and they look like they are about to die.

 

Warm 2 is great for watching the walking dead though.

 

Also warm 2, modifies my whites, to look yellow/green.

 

Experts say WARM2 should replicate what our eyes see outside. I can guarantee that outside people's faces do not look yellow/green to me.

Some people are pale... and beyond pale, but they do not look like they have jaundice.

 

Even a tanned person looks reasonably unhealthy with warm 2 turned on.

post #3257 of 7316
Regarding internet speeds on my devices:

I have 50Mbps Comcast service.

Wired laptop gets 70Mbps
Wireless PC gets 25Mbps
Sony Bluray (on Crackle) shows 38Mbps
X1 download shows 14Mbps

X900 TV doesn't have speed display but
WWW for testmy.net shows 7Mbps

(also recently speedof.me site is no longer available on TV)

At this point, I just throw up my hands and say "screw it!" smile.gif
post #3258 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeSoFl View Post

Same issue here with programs on the channels you mentioned. On TNT there was an episode of one of the Law and Order bunch and there was significant stutter in panning shots. I have Comcast and am pretty sure that's the way they're bringing the program into their head end. Also keep in mind a lot of these replay dramas are slightly sped up so they can get an additional minute or two of commercial time per hour.

Are you seeing the same problem on other TV's?

I also have a brand new Sony KDL-55W900A (great TV btw) and I notice a lot of the same behaviors. Not quite exactly the same, as the KDL is just a bit more soap opera-y than the XBR but similar, which I guess makes sense because they're probably using a similar processing engine.

Thanks to everyone for the responses. I wasn't sure if I should start looking at recabling my house but based on what I'm reading here, that's not going to help. Perhaps a software update in the future will clean things up.

Oh and I have Comcast/Xfinity in case anyone was wondering.

And for the record, we're loving this TV so far.
post #3259 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitico303 View Post

I talked with Sony Italy about the "issue" of the 540p resolution with 3D contents. This is what they told me:

If we talk about the ability of the screen to present a 3D image, the maximum resolution that comes to the individual viewer's eye is 1080px namely:
3840 x 1080 Left Eye
3840 x 1080 Right Eye
Virtual 3D image - 3840 x 2160

Obviously, for this you must have a 4K native 3D content, so if you refer to the resolution of a single image, right or left is 1080.

 If we start from a content FHD the factors are:
1920 x 540 Left Eye
1920 x 540 Right Eye
Virtual 3D image - 1920 x 1080

Added to this there is to consider the 4K upscaling 
on the screen. In this case the native resolution of the 3D content is necessarily 540px


And about the horizontal lines on the 55":

The lines noticed are probably due to the FPR filter in front of this panel, needed for the passive 3D technology

Hmmm. There isn't any 4K 3D content, not that this TV is capable of displaying it anyway. Even Panasonic's all-singing all-dancing active 3D 4K does NOT accept 4K 3D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johanverschuren View Post

6500K is daylight temperature. Get use to Warm 2 and after a while you will see that the colors are accurate. All the studio's and motion pictures are using 6500K as color temperature.

This.

People can wax lyrical about their preferences until the cows come home, and that's fine. You like what you like. But if you want accuracy, then there can be only one: 6500K. If you have not calibrated your set to that standard - which is not as simple as just setting it to Warm 2, although that's a start - then you are not seeing video content as it was intended to be seen. It's that simple.

Yes, it does look overly yellow if you're not used it, but give it time and your brain equalises; whites look white, blacks looks black and everything in between is as accurate as possible. If I switch over to Neutral or Cool, even Warm 1, people look like Smurfs because the colour is incredibly blue.

Also, I've got no problems with gamma tracking or greyscale set to Warm 2. The gamma is tracking as flat as I've ever seen it and delta errors in the greyscale max out at 2, the average error being 1.1.
post #3260 of 7316
+1, Geoff. Thank you for confirming. With a display this expensive, everyone should consider either DIY or professional calibration. It is the only way to realize the full potential of this wonderful hardware.
post #3261 of 7316
What's the cheapest you can get into being able to do a calibration? I've looked at the CalMan software and light sensor bundles but don't know what's really needed at a minimum to get started.
post #3262 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by laakness View Post

What's the cheapest you can get into being able to do a calibration? I've looked at the CalMan software and light sensor bundles but don't know what's really needed at a minimum to get started.

 

This is a good "bundle" that will allow you to calibrate your display:  http://store.spectracal.com/consumer/calman5-bundles/spectracal-c3-with-calman-5-basic.html

 

Of course, you need a laptop to run the software.  The "Basic" CalMAN version is a good starting place, and likely everything you will ever need.  However, there are no-penalty software upgrade options if you want more advanced capabilities.  So far, I am still using Basic, and it meets my needs.

post #3263 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by quovadis123 View Post

Could you guys please comment on WARM2?

When i watch a news channel like CNN HD or any other channels, peoples faces look slightly yellow/green and they look like they are about to die.

Warm 2 is great for watching the walking dead though.

Also warm 2, modifies my whites, to look yellow/green.

Experts say WARM2 should replicate what our eyes see outside. I can guarantee that outside people's faces do not look yellow/green to me.
Some people are pale... and beyond pale, but they do not look like they have jaundice.

Even a tanned person looks reasonably unhealthy with warm 2 turned on.

IMHO Warm 2 looks terrible. It looks like on the film cameras we used to use, using a daylight (5600K) filter in a tungsten (3200K) lit room, everything looks yellowish orange. If the whites aren't white the color balance is off and needs to be balanced.
post #3264 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreaux View Post

IMHO Warm 2 looks terrible. It looks like on the film cameras we used to use, using a daylight (5600K) filter in a tungsten (3200K) lit room, everything looks yellowish orange. If the whites aren't white the color balance is off and needs to be balanced.

For those responding to the Warm2 question, it would also be helpful if you commented as well: have you had your set calibrated, either a DIY calibration with colorimeter and software, or by a professional calibrator?

Geoff has answered, and we know he does a DIY calibration.
post #3265 of 7316
I had my set before this one calibrated by D-Nice of Value electronics in NY before it was shipped to me. It was the Sharp Elite Pro 70" X5. I felt it looked dull, lacked contrast and was somewhat too warm looking.
I went back to "Standard" and tweaked it by eye and it looked stunning. For me I go by my eye. I spent 30 years shooting both film and tape and spent great lengths of time in control rooms. My set looks like any monitor in the control room. We just used scopes and bars to set the color spectrum.
Is it correct, not sure but it still looks awfully good to me.
post #3266 of 7316

I THINK IM GOING NUTS !!!

 

JERRY....

 

When you give us the long lists of numbers to plug into our tv, in settings and advanced settings...turning things on, and off etc...IS THIS NOT CALIBRATING OUR TV'S?

 

Are you saying we need a professional to come to our tv's to calibrate the tv, before we plug in your settings?

 

I'm totally confused now.

 

I thought that you had calibrated your tv, with specialized equipment, and you give us the results so we can do the same.

post #3267 of 7316
Entering settings is not the same as calibrating. If you go back and read my posts, I have always said that certain settings vary from panel to panel. White balance, for example, is very important for establishing correct RGB balance and gray scale. White balance settings can vary, and can only be properly set by a meter and test patterns (or someone with an exceptional eye). So, if you simply copy my White balance settings, or someone else's, you could end up with incorrect settings for your panel. This in turn could cause the various color temperature settings to produce different results.

I don't think you need to be overly concerned, Set your display how you like it. If you still don't think it is correct, have it professionally calibrated. Let's move on.
post #3268 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

Entering settings is not the same as calibrating. If you go back and read my posts, I have always said that certain settings vary from panel to panel. White balance, for example, is very important for establishing correct RGB balance and gray scale. White balance settings can vary, and can only be properly set by a meter and test patterns (or someone with an exceptional eye). So, if you simply copy my White balance settings, or someone else's, you could end up with incorrect settings for your panel. This in turn could cause the various color temperature settings to produce different results.

I don't think you need to be overly concerned, Set your display how you like it. If you still don't think it is correct, have it professionally calibrated. Let's move on.

Well this may explain why warm 2 gives me greenish/yellow skin tones and they probably look ok on your tv.

I guess turning off warm 2 does the trick for me..

I certainly have learnt something tonight...I was sure we were both watching the same warm 2, and evidently we are not.

post #3269 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinJerry View Post

This is a good "bundle" that will allow you to calibrate your display:  http://store.spectracal.com/consumer/calman5-bundles/spectracal-c3-with-calman-5-basic.html

I gather this is a PC only product. Anyone got a favorite that runs on a Mac?

thx
post #3270 of 7316
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjnbos View Post

I gather this is a PC only product. Anyone got a favorite that runs on a Mac?

thx

Well, you could call SpectraCal to see if they have a solution for a Mac. I'n not a Mac expert, but can't you run Windows emulation software on the Mac to allow you to use PC software?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: LCD Flat Panel Displays
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › LCD Flat Panel Displays › Official Sony [X9] XBR-55X900A / XBR-65X900A Owner's Thread