or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Unofficial Sony VPL-VW1100ES Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Unofficial Sony VPL-VW1100ES Thread - Page 2

post #31 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Hopefully AV Science Sales 5 in his daily nag Sony call will find out it the external RJ45 3D sync port is maintained on the new board for the 1100ES. I think we should all chip in and pay for a direct Red phone hot line from him to the Sony ES product manager.

I answered this one several times already. People just do not like the answer. smile.gif Sony tells me the VW100ES, upgraded VW1000ES and the VW1100ES uses IR glasses and IR emitter.
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 182
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AV Science Sales 5 View Post

I answered this one several times already. People just do not like the answer. smile.gif Sony tells me the VW100ES, upgraded VW1000ES and the VW1100ES uses IR glasses and IR emitter.

Putting down cigar and slamming hammer on table, We know it uses an internal IR emitter. Question, bang bang, is the external emitter RJ45 jack that allows the hookup of an external IR emitter on the 1000ES, maintained on the 1100ES? If so, one could disable the internal IR emitter by plugging into that jack and plugging either an external IR or FR emitter into it. If no RJ45 jack on the 1100ES, all is still not lost because aftermarket kits like the Monster one have RF emitters with an IR cable with an IR sensor at the other end.
post #33 of 182
My installer tells me to wait and avoid to buy this projector because of possible
problems with the new hdmi present inside it, at least until hdmi2.0 will be
definitively released (this was a rumor at Cedia he told me).
Besides the fact that 1100 supports only 4:2:0 at 8 bit makes me worry
about compatibility with forthcoming 4k blurays and ultra hd tv..
Do you know if Sony is going to announce an upgrade...?
Could it be a good idea to wait Jenuary 2014?
Edited by Grifo - 10/17/13 at 10:07am
post #34 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Putting down cigar and slamming hammer on table, We know it uses an internal IR emitter. Question, bang bang, is the external emitter RJ45 jack that allows the hookup of an external IR emitter on the 1000ES, maintained on the 1100ES? If so, one could disable the internal IR emitter by plugging into that jack and plugging either an external IR or FR emitter into it. If no RJ45 jack on the 1100ES, all is still not lost because aftermarket kits like the Monster one have RF emitters with an IR cable with an IR sensor at the other end.

Sent you the answer. Yes has port.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grifo View Post

My installer tells me to wait and avoid to buy this projector because of possible
problems with the new hdmi present inside it, at least until hdmi2.0 will be
definitively released (this was a rumor at Cedia he told me).
Besides the fact that 1100 supports only 4:2:0 at 8 bit makes me worry
about compatibility with forthcoming 4k blurays and ultra hd tv..
Do you know if Sony is going to announce an upgrade...?
Could it be a good idea to wait Jenuary 2014?

HDMI 2.0 has been released. So that is already set. This happened before CEDIA.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 182
Thread Starter 
In case anyone missed Mike's response to me, the 1100ES maintains the RJ45 sync and power port for the external IR emitter. This would disable the internal emitter if used. And the port doesn't care if the external emitter is RF or IR. So the UK brochure is right. You can plug in the external sony RF emitter which looks identical to the xpand RF emitter and use RF glasses. If you want to use both IR and RF at the same time, you can't plug into the port but will have to sync the RF emitter by an optical IR pick up and power the RF emitter from a wall wart power supply.
post #37 of 182
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grifo View Post

My installer tells me to wait and avoid to buy this projector because of possible
problems with the new hdmi present inside it, at least until hdmi2.0 will be
definitively released (this was a rumor at Cedia he told me).
Besides the fact that 1100 supports only 4:2:0 at 8 bit makes me worry
about compatibility with forthcoming 4k blurays and ultra hd tv..
Do you know if Sony is going to announce an upgrade...?
Could it be a good idea to wait Jenuary 2014?

At 4K 60 4:2:0 who says the projector will support only 8 bits? HDMI 4K 60 at 4:2:0 will support 10 bits definitely and I think 12 bits. The 500/600 and the 1100ES should support 10 bits 4K 60 no problem at 4:2:0.
post #38 of 182
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

X.v. color uses 0-15 and 241-255 to create in essence negative RGB values and the actual triangle you get is dominated by the luminance value. The primaries for calibration purposes are the rec 709 primaries but the actual color space is wider. Blue is slightly more saturated, red by a noticeable amount and green quite a lot. Yellow is much more saturated. I haven't found an exact area percentage as to how much bigger x.v. color is compared to rec 709 by somewhere between 70 and 80% I would guess. Both the 500/600 and 1000/1100 can do it. The Mastered in 4 K Sony discs are supposedly encoded in it and the Sony server content I assume will also be x.v. color. DCI is not relevant since consumer sources are not available in it but if you are a Big boy and have a commercial theater machine you can get such sources. Neither machine can do ITU2020 and the issue will be what will the color space be for 4K Blurays? My guess is it will be x.v. color. This will purely be a political issue and I think Sony has enough votes to force this result. That's my take.

I would expand this quote a bit. The DCI color space RG triangle connecting line is closer than the xyYcc (x.v. color) space that Triluminous can support. that's why insertion of a yellow filter is required to replicated the DCI color space.
post #39 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

At 4K 60 4:2:0 who says the projector will support only 8 bits? HDMI 4K 60 at 4:2:0 will support 10 bits definitely and I think 12 bits. The 500/600 and the 1100ES should support 10 bits 4K 60 no problem at 4:2:0.

Specs from Sony youtube promotion video.vpl-500es.

3840 x 2160/50p
3840 x 2160/60p
4096 x 2160/50p
4096 x 2016/60p

Only supports YUV 4:2:0 8-Bit format signal
post #40 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

At 4K 60 4:2:0 who says the projector will support only 8 bits? HDMI 4K 60 at 4:2:0 will support 10 bits definitely and I think 12 bits. The 500/600 and the 1100ES should support 10 bits 4K 60 no problem at 4:2:0.

The 8-bit limitation probably came from the following chart posted a few weeks ago by another forum member. Assuming that chart is correct and if the Sony HDMI 2.0 chips are limited to the 10.2 Gbps bandwidth (instead of the full 18 Gbps) then it appears the 4K at 60Hz would be limited to only 8-bits and 4:2:0. Anther member has said that the Sony HDMI 2.0 chps are limited to 10.2 Gbps while Panasonic has 18 Gbps in their new 4K LED TVs shipping by the end of this year.

post #41 of 182
Thread Starter 
I checked with Sony and have revised my earlier post, at present the 1100ES will only be able to handle 8 bits at 4K 60 4:2:0. Just like the 1000ES uograde, I would not be surprised to see an HDMI chip upgrade for the 1100ES to handle 10 bits at 4K 60 4:2:0.
Edited by mark haflich - 10/17/13 at 1:42pm
post #42 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

Always ready to help out, Mark.

Does anyone know or have any experience with the EluneVision PureBright 4k 240 screen? It seems very similar--in gain, retro-reflectivity, viewing angle, etc.--to the Dalite HP2.4 but claims to be smoother and more '4K capable'. Is it any better re 4K than the HP? Does it approach Mark's Holy Grail of the Stewart Snomatt in smoothness, etc.?
After taking a closer look at the samples last night, the EVPB looks identical to the DLHP, including the texture. I didn't have my HP sample taped down flat, and I think that is what made them look ever so slightly different.
post #43 of 182
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by millerwill View Post

Always ready to help out, Mark.

Does anyone know or have any experience with the EluneVision PureBright 4k 240 screen? It seems very similar--in gain, retro-reflectivity, viewing angle, etc.--to the Dalite HP2.4 but claims to be smoother and more '4K capable'. Is it any better re 4K than the HP? Does it approach Mark's Holy Grail of the Stewart Snomatt in smoothness, etc.?

Maybe in screen discussions I should be called Sir Mark, Knight of King Arthur, after all I use his flour in my bread baking.
post #44 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

I checked with Sony and have revised my earlier post, at present the 1100ES will only be able to handle 8 bits at 4K 60 4:2:0. Just like the 1000ES uograde, I would not be surprised to see an HDMI chip upgrade for the 1100ES to handle 10 bits at 4K 60 4:2:0.

Hi Mark,

Can you expand on this some more? It sounds like you're saying that the 1000ES upgrade will take it to a 1100ES and only handle 8 bits 4K 60 4:2:0, but that some future upgrade might be possible to upgrade the HDMI chip to handle 10+ bits? Is Sony in such a hurry to get these out that they couldn't wait and use full 18GB HDMI 2.0 chips? Did I lose something in translation?

Thanks,
Steve

P.S.,
B-stock on order and upgrade to follow. Not sure what to do with Lumagen XS3D yet.
post #45 of 182
Thread Starter 
Not really, an upgraded 1000ES to a 1100ES and a new 1100ES will only handle 8 bits at 4K 60 4:2:0. I assume this is because those machines will use the 10 plus GB HDMI 2.0 chips because the 18 GB HDMI 2.0 won't be available to Sony foir awhile, maybe 2nd Q 2014. In the 1000ES thread, post 6357, I expanded on this, how the upgrade or an 1100ES does not include a CMS let alone a 4K CMS, nor a 4K vertical stretch function for 4K anamorphic vertical stretches, and how the expanded color space, the Sony Triluminous stuff, will only cover the increased space associated with the particular xvYcc (x.v. color) space Sony choses to create} and not the full B.T. 2020 space. All this may force a 4K Bluray spec, because Sony reportedly controls the 4K Bluray forum, that only includes x.v. color at an agreed upon xvYcc space and 8 bits at 4K 60. Blurays at 1080p are already limited to 8 bits though the Sony Mastered in 4K Blurays are supposedly coded in x.v. color. Obviously, when the 18GB chips become a available Sony could do an upgrade ala the one for the 1000ES applicable to upgraded 1000ES and 1100ES. But to me I think Sony should wait until the 18GB chips are available.

To me not including 4K vertical stretch and a 4K CMS is inexcusable. Sony provided a 4K CMS in the 500/600 and if Sony is using a third party chip for 1080p stretch and none being available for a 4K stretch, they should put in a large scale field gate array and program it to do a 4K stretch.
Edited by mark haflich - 10/29/13 at 4:42pm
post #46 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Obviously, when the 18GB chips become a available Sony could do an upgrade ala the one for the 1000ES applicable to upgraded 1000ES and 1100ES. But to me I think Sony should wait until the 18GB chips are available.

An upgrade: what I hope..what would make this projector future proof for some time..
Could Sony Dave or someone else from Sony or close to Sony tell some words?
post #47 of 182
[quote name="mark haflich" url="/t/1494998/unofficial-sony-t

To me not including 4K vertical stretch and a 4K CMS is inexcusable. Sony provided a 4K CMS in the 500/600 and if Sony is using a third party chip for 1080p stretch and none being available for a 4K stretch, they should put in a large scale field gate array and program it to do a 4K stretch.[/quote]

I'm not arguing, but who says their cms or autocal will be any good? A lot of people will strain their budgets to get the 500/600. Most who have the 1000/1100 will likely be able to get or already have a lumagen...and chances are it will do a better job than an internal PJ solution. What would be worse is if they included some inferior features, and had to charge more for them...and people buy outboard solutions in the end regardless.
post #48 of 182
I agree, at this price point, people should be considering a video processor for a CMS. I don't think any of the included CMS's are mathematically correct. This would give them a mathematically correct CMS and a vertical stretch for an A-lens. They would also get no-ring scaling and many other features.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 182
It's hard to even consider a Lumagen until it supports HDCP 2.2, since that's what the 4k sources require.
post #50 of 182
Thread Starter 
While I use a Lumagen for many things including its CMS, and its scaling, until the 4K in Lumagen comes out, no CMS nor vertical stretch for 4K sources. BTW. RCohen I don't get what HDCP protection has to do with the Lumagen. It isn't a display last time I looked. It just has to pass on the signals, codes, whatever. The display has to be HDCP 2.2, and the 1100ES is that.

Now my good friend Mike. Are you actually arguing that Sony should not do something because they won't do it right? Are you serious? They shouldn't attempt a CMS because they would not use the right let's call it math. They shouldn't provide for 4K vertical stretch. I guess they should remove the lower resolution stretch they have now and lower the price. With an external processor, you could take a lot out of the Sony. Now, I love Lumagen's scaling and I find the Sony to be less than perfect here, it rings a bit and Lumagen's scaling doesn't. Hello Sony. Your scaling could be better, glad to say you made it better in the 1100ES and it doesn't ring any more. Excuse me? Sorry you didn't do that either. Its OK, I have a Lumagen 4K out machine coming to replace my present Radiance.

I fully understand that owning a Lumagen is a must in my opinion for any high quality system. It is so multifaceted. It allows much fining tuning not otherwise possible. It is better at many things. BTW You should have been pitching for Detroit last night. But that is not excuse to leave something out of a machine and force the user to go elsewhere.

A sports car comes with decent tires. But there are better. Suppose you go to the dealer to pick your new car up. The dealer says your car doesn't come with tires. Not even a semi decent set to get you home? Nope.As soon as you go across the street to the tire store and get 4 tires of quality A plus or whatever, bring em back and you can put them on the car and drive off. Yea. Your installer can balance them up, inflate them to the right pressure, and put them on if you can't yourself. Don't look at me that way. We thought about including not as good tires in the price of the car and we can't get the best ones anyway, so we said WTF let you fend for your self. Think of it as saving money. I smile. Its OK I wanted the best tires available anyway and I brought my installer with me.

Am I mad at Sony? Not really about the CMS or vertical stretch I could care less about vertical stretch. CMS? Not mad either for a variety of reasons. Scaling could be better. I am not happy about that but I have external better. I can live without the things Sony didn't do feature wise because I am a Lumagen boy even more than Mike.

But that is no excuse for leaving things out. Take my best friend, Joerod. He is worldly acclaimed and he doesn't use a processor, let alone a Lumagen. Calibration? CMS. Ringing? He doesn't hear any. Let them colors pop, his guests love them. I am not picking on Joerod, but not everyone is a HT perfectionist. But if some manufacturer were to send him a A lens to review on his Sony with 4K sources he might change his tune. I know, he would simply get a Lumagen, and down res the 4K signal to 1080p so that the Sony vertical stretch would work and then let the Sony scale it back to 4K.. If I told him the Lumagen would stretch it at 4K, he would tell me he tried it and the picture looked better doing it his way.

OK Enough kidding. So you need a Lumagen and most of us have one already and will trade it in for a 4K out and then a 4K in.

But what about the slower chips and the consequent limitation to 8 bit 4K 60? And the impact this might have on our sport? And going to a wider color space, x.v. color. What drove that? Could it be wanting to sell Mastered in 4K Blurays and x.v. color can be done consistent with the existing 1080p bluray standard?
post #51 of 182
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grifo View Post

An upgrade: what I hope..what would make this projector future proof for some time..
Could Sony Dave or someone else from Sony or close to Sony tell some words?

I said they could. Not that they have said anything or will do anything. When the 1000ES, they promised and they delivered. No promises here, yet, and maybe none will come. If the 4K Bluray standard is forced by Sony exercising its political power to be 4K 60 at 8 bits, there is no need for any chip replacement, the Sony 4K server is 8 bits. That pretty much covers the sources uness Netflix etc comes out with 10 bit sources, yea right..
post #52 of 182
I was assuming HDCP 2.2 support would be needed end-to-end. Maybe not, then.

So, does it work with the FMP-X1, then, as long as the display device has HDCP 2.2? Even though the Lumagen doesn't have HDMI 2.0?

Doing a lens really well is expensive, even with a lowly 2k lens: lens + curved screen + Lumagen

I need to spend some more time tinkering with it. Hopefully, I don't like it!
post #53 of 182
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcohen View Post

I was assuming HDCP 2.2 support would be needed end-to-end. Maybe not, then.

So, does it work with the FMP-X1, then, as long as the display device has HDCP 2.2? Even though the Lumagen doesn't have HDMI 2.0?

Doing a lens really well is expensive, even with a lowly 2k lens: lens + curved screen + Lumagen

I need to spend some more time tinkering with it. Hopefully, I don't like it!

R. You know the answer. No it won't work because the Lumagen does not have UHD/4K inputs and won't until it gets chips, so you can't route the FMP-X1 through it, HDCP2.2 or not. The Lumagen is a relay component, it does not have to be HDCP2.2 compliant. All it has to do is relay the handshaking between the encrypted source and the compliant display.
post #54 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

While I use a Lumagen for many things including its CMS, and its scaling, until the 4K in Lumagen comes out, no CMS nor vertical stretch for 4K sources. BTW. RCohen I don't get what HDCP protection has to do with the Lumagen. It isn't a display last time I looked. It just has to pass on the signals, codes, whatever. The display has to be HDCP 2.2, and the 1100ES is that.

Now my good friend Mike. Are you actually arguing that Sony should not do something because they won't do it right? Are you serious? They shouldn't attempt a CMS because they would not use the right let's call it math. They shouldn't provide for 4K vertical stretch. I guess they should remove the lower resolution stretch they have now and lower the price. With an external processor, you could take a lot out of the Sony. Now, I love Lumagen's scaling and I find the Sony to be less than perfect here, it rings a bit and Lumagen's scaling doesn't. Hello Sony. Your scaling could be better, glad to say you made it better in the 1100ES and it doesn't ring any more. Excuse me? Sorry you didn't do that either. Its OK, I have a Lumagen 4K out machine coming to replace my present Radiance.

I fully understand that owning a Lumagen is a must in my opinion for any high quality system. It is so multifaceted. It allows much fining tuning not otherwise possible. It is better at many things. BTW You should have been pitching for Detroit last night. But that is not excuse to leave something out of a machine and force the user to go elsewhere.

A sports car comes with decent tires. But there are better. Suppose you go to the dealer to pick your new car up. The dealer says your car doesn't come with tires. Not even a semi decent set to get you home? Nope.As soon as you go across the street to the tire store and get 4 tires of quality A plus or whatever, bring em back and you can put them on the car and drive off. Yea. Your installer can balance them up, inflate them to the right pressure, and put them on if you can't yourself. Don't look at me that way. We thought about including not as good tires in the price of the car and we can't get the best ones anyway, so we said WTF let you fend for your self. Think of it as saving money. I smile. Its OK I wanted the best tires available anyway and I brought my installer with me.

Am I mad at Sony? Not really about the CMS or vertical stretch I could care less about vertical stretch. CMS? Not mad either for a variety of reasons. Scaling could be better. I am not happy about that but I have external better. I can live without the things Sony didn't do feature wise because I am a Lumagen boy even more than Mike.

But that is no excuse for leaving things out. Take my best friend, Joerod. He is worldly acclaimed and he doesn't use a processor, let alone a Lumagen. Calibration? CMS. Ringing? He doesn't hear any. Let them colors pop, his guests love them. I am not picking on Joerod, but not everyone is a HT perfectionist. But if some manufacturer were to send him a A lens to review on his Sony with 4K sources he might change his tune. I know, he would simply get a Lumagen, and down res the 4K signal to 1080p so that the Sony vertical stretch would work and then let the Sony scale it back to 4K.. If I told him the Lumagen would stretch it at 4K, he would tell me he tried it and the picture looked better doing it his way.

OK Enough kidding. So you need a Lumagen and most of us have one already and will trade it in for a 4K out and then a 4K in.

But what about the slower chips and the consequent limitation to 8 bit 4K 60? And the impact this might have on our sport? And going to a wider color space, x.v. color. What drove that? Could it be wanting to sell Mastered in 4K Blurays and x.v. color can be done consistent with the existing 1080p bluray standard?

No, I do not like that the 500, 600,1000 and 1100 do not do the required vertical stretch. Would make life simpler if it did. As for the CMS, that would be nice to have also, but I would be willing to bet the Lumagen would still do a better job. Unfortunately there is no 4K Lumagen available yet, so we will have to wait.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 182
The best CMS are the ones you don't have to use, most all the ones I've seen on LCD or LCOS units have side effects, generally it causes a slight dirtiness by adding mild posterization. I am starting to think on many projectors that the benefits to adjusting the CMS are usually overrided by the negative effects to the image. It is often better to only adjust the gray scale. DLP's do not seem to have the issue as bad for some reason, and I think the reason is inherent into the tech (though a DLP can posterize some, it is usually easier to spot by eye so you know when it is doing it). LCOS and LCD do a slight dirtying effect and it is hard to notice unless you are very careful, but the problem is that it will be very noticeable on certain content, and you will start to think that it was a bad transfer (and it may have been), but truth be told it can make a semi-ok transfer look dirty without you even knowing it did. The hardest part about calibrating is knowing when or NOT to change the CMS and how far to go. I have to back of a little even on a DLP's CMS sometimes, because of posterization.

It's like how people procalim the Epson does 1500 lumens with accurate color, well even with the LPE filter (or whatever it is called), the 1500 lumen mode is not as clean as the 700 lumen mode, there is additional pixelization, some may not always see it, but it is there. People that do NOT see it haven't watched the correct content.
post #56 of 182
Thread Starter 
Everybody who willingly has a dog, loves it and thinks while you dog is nice and loveable too, his dog is better than your dog even if it has a few fleas.

So when whatever you want to watch comes on, you watch and enjoy regardless of whether Coderguy is trying to posterize your viewing ability.

Rather than say if you don't see it you are not watching the correct stuff, I would say if you see it you are watching the wrong stuff.
post #57 of 182
It is often hard to see before and after improvements in color after CMS changes, since most of the projectors have gamuts "close enough", though gray scale is easy to see. So I just say if you are so picky as to want perfect color, then I'd bet the same people are even pickier to about posterization if they A/B'n two projectors when calibrating. Some projectors cause posterization even from gray scale or gamma only though (like JVC's, change the individual gamma points at your own peril).

It would be interesting to see if the Lumagen can maintain a clean calibration, but unless I am mistaken, my thoughts are since all the PRO calibrators recommend using the internal CMS first to get it as close as possible and then use the lumagen, that it isn't magic either. Though some of that recommendation comes from the fact that you can only shrink the gamut and not expand it with a CMS, but still overall it seems all to be a losing proposition.

Don't even calibrate the projector anymore, just watch in Green Eggs and Ham torch mode (my new recommendation).
post #58 of 182
it doesn't look like the R709 setting needs much help, this looks pretty darn good to me. It's all about the saturation tracking.

post-sat-tracking.jpg


Grayscale through the glasses is not great, this can definitely be corrected to a degree. hardly anyone talks about 3D color calibration but it can make a noticeable difference. Why shouldn't color in 3D looks reasonably correct...?

3d-pre-rgb.png
post #59 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

Grayscale through the glasses is not great, this can definitely be corrected to a degree. hardly anyone talks about 3D color calibration but it can make a noticeable difference. Why shouldn't color in 3D looks reasonably correct...?

3d-pre-rgb.png

Yup that gray scale would look far too yellow to the eye in the brighter scenes. Too much red and green with little blue = looks yellow usually (and too green at times as well I suppose, but yellow is noticed the most because skin tones become jaundice looking). Though so many movies are mastered now with jaundice looking skin tones even when the color is calibrated correctly.
post #60 of 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post

it doesn't look like the R709 setting needs much help, this looks pretty darn good to me. It's all about the saturation tracking.

post-sat-tracking.jpg


Color point luminance is every bit as important as x & y. How does it measure? smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP › Unofficial Sony VPL-VW1100ES Thread