behind display ambient lighting

Rope lights. Small fixtures with thin T-5 florescent lamps, available in up to 65K temp. Colored LEDs.

I personally think that this is a case of what suits your tastes. There is seemingly a market for blue backlighting. About the only white that does not work for me is cool white, but then the wall behind my display is brick.

I use rope light from Home Depot! $9.99

Follow the well-proven viewing environment practices recommended by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) and you will get the specific benefits intended. Deviate from the principles of imaging science, display industry standards and human perceptual factors those recommedations are founded upon and you will only get diminished results. The wrong color of lighting behind a TV skews your color perception. Personal taste in video display setup has little to nothing to do with image fidelity.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art just ordered about $9,000.00 worth of correct viewing environment lighting from us for their new video production facility. The Factor5/LucasArts game studio also just ordered from us. Follow the rules of the system and you'll be more likely to win. Excellence rarely comes from cutting corners. You can find other sources for the right solutions but you won't arrive at the best results unless you understand and apply the correct principles.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I don't challenge the idea that you sell a good and useful product; I think that you do. The price is what it is. But you are selling in a sea of over-hyped aftermarket products of uncertain benefit. Clearly some people feel a great pressure to buy a particular product, without which, they somehow will not be fully satisfied.

I personally don't care for colored backlights. However, many people quite literally don't see it that way. The are happy with no lights, happy with rope lights, or like me happy with a near 65K light or (as it turns out) a halogen track light washing the wall above the display.

Those not using your product may miss something, but regularly report a subjective benefit. Arguably not what they might get with your product, but still a benefit. Only they can decide about the desired ratio to cost.

So I said and still say, it is a matter of taste and it is. I like $100 a bottle cab and $30/lb coffee, I like them, but I don't buy them. The $100 a bottle wine we can agree is better. I drink the Gallo Sonoma; some people like the "torch" setting on the display.

how are you guys mounting the rope light? Please post pictures if you have them.

shark - well rope lights come with clips so you can go that way.

syphon - ikea carries small lights that are very affordable. some have an adjustable bezel around them, they have different types so you could use them in any setting.

and no offense G. Allen Brown but wft did that have to do with his request? he said besides your product. sounded like a cut and paste canned speech.

sincerely SMC, President Widget Co.

jp

Sorry, I should have clarified a little better.... I'm curious in which way people are "stringing" or what design the lights are in behind the tv or even around the rooms. I plan on mounted some under my bar counter top and possibly behind the crown moulding, but trying to gather other ideas. Ideally, I'd like to mount sconces on either side of the tv but I have much room on that wall and don't want it to look cluttered.

I've always been curious, what exactly is the point of behind-display backlighting? Does it stay on during the movie/viewing session? What purpose does it serve? My guess is to draw attention to the screen?...

Google "video bias lighting" or search AVS Forum for "bias lighting (backlighting)."

btw, they also make a clear channel that you can use to install rope lighting instead of the clips. Its supposed to keep the rope straighter (even light) and does not have the issue of the clips breaking over time.

I have used other lights near/behind my RPTV, and also Ideal-lume lights. I've also tried watching with no lights or watching with lights on the opposite wall. In my opinion, nothing I've used beats or even comes close to the Ideal-lume lights.

Should these lights be used behind the screen on a front projection set-up? I've always thought that with front projection you wanted it as dark as possible, like a theater.

Only in very rare setups to solve specific problems. Generally, you're right, ambient light in the room is destructive of front projection images. This topic is discussed in more detail in the 'Bias Lighting (Backlighting)' thread.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Its in the lighting aisle. A lot of time its used for under cabninet lighting. I think Hampton Bay makes a version.

try EL (electro-luminscence) wire, the same one used by computer case modders. They require little power and run cool. Plus if u have an HTPC nearby, you can just hook it to the computer's power supply. It's basically like neon on a string. You can probably wrap it around the back of your flat panel display.

Look at Vibelights . com . They sell by the foot and also have power inverters for them with brightness controls and also sound sensitivity.

The CinemaQuest site says:

I'm sorry. I must be missing something.

Since the spectrum of this light will reflect or be absorbed by the wall according to the properties of the paint and construction materials, why does it have to originally be D65? Most entertainment environments are not painted black, white or grey (BWG) so the light that reflects will be colored by the wall interaction and will NOT be D65 when it enters the eye.

I concede that in a BWG environment, a D65 bias light would be preferable to others as all frequencies would be equally reflected. In all other environments, I have a hard time understanding why it would matter. Moreover, since the light would be guaranteed to NOT be D65 after reflection, it would seem to be the worst possible choice for those non-BWG environments.

As I said, I must be missing something.

You are not missing a thing, other than the fact that we also recommend to anyone interested in viewing environment solutions that they consider incorporating a neutral colored wall behind the display. In my experience "most entertainment environments" are maintained by consumers who don't really care that much about image fidelity and likely would never go to the trouble of considering a bias light of any color. Many folks who might be inclined toward better imaging live in rental properties or new homes that have white walls or slightly off-white. Some hobbyist/videophile types start out with high CRI 6500K backlights and change the wall color later.

I have advised many inquiring about our high-dollar D65 professional model not to bother with the extra expense unless they had a truly neutral surround behind the display. The purpose of providing better viewing environment conditions is to improve the viewing experience. Any type of light behind a TV can help with eyestrain, perceived black level and avoiding screen reflections. However, the SMPTE recommendations pertaining to viewing conditions devote much more discussion to preserving accurate color perception. That discussion includes providing ambient lighting as close as possible to D65 and a neutral colored surround. Incorporating these elements will result in better imaging.


Worst possible choice? Surely you're not serious. Yes, I know you're name isn't Shirley.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Physics is a good thing, isn't it?


Sorry, but I disagree. Most of the people that you describe probably watch with one or more lights on in the room. I know all my relatives do. This is a form of bias lighting. Improperly placed, yes; but, bias lighting none the less.

Ends up, my Mom was on to something when she forced me to watch our B&W TV with some light in the room.


And if they are neutral white, a D65 will work as advertised, if not, it won't.


I certainly did. However, I believe the number of folks who have this capability to be small. (not a lot of WAF in a neutral Black, White or Grey (BWG) wall, much less room, carpet and furnishings)


Yet this is not what you suggest to your LOW dollar customers, eh?


First, Shirley is just a nickname I picked up when I was drunk one time. But that is not important right now.

Second, I'm very serious as I believe you are. All of your discussion above talks about color accuracy. If my walls are green, using a red+blue (cyan) light would make more sense to attempt to get a more neutral color from the reflection than a D65 light.

Put another way, using a D65 light will reflect green. Can't I use any white light to do that? Why would the green reflected by a D65 light be better than the green reflected by a halogen or incandescent or rope light?

I think you said it best yourself (paraphrase): If the user is not going to re-paint their room (or at least the surfaces they plan to shine this on) to a neutral BWG color scheme, don't bother with D65 lighting as the expense is not worth it. I think that is good advise for everyone, no matter their price range.

To the original poster: I'm sorry for high-jacking your thread. I hope you find the discussion useful and if you have a neutral white, black or grey wall behind your TV, try a D65 light. If not, I believe the other suggestions above will work at least as well.

Agreement isn't necessary, as long as the debate is clearly stated, logical and mutually respectful. The science in electronic imaging and human perceptual factors is well established and that debate is settled. Each individual can decide for himself how far to go toward the implementation of the principles. Most viewing environments, and listening environments as well, suffer from some compromise or other. Multi-purpose viewing environments often have overriding and conflicting design priorities that detract from ideal viewing conditions. My mission is to promote best practice for reference imaging and help viewers intelligently eliminate as many obstacles to image fidelity as they care to implement.

Here's a link to Joe Kane's web site that presents a number of spectral radience graphs of various common illuminants:

http://videoessentials.com/res_facts.php#spectral

Note particularly the color spectrum of a typical incandescent lamp. That's why most rope lighting is a poor choice for backlighting, if color perception is of concern. Roughly speaking, this spectrum of backlighting could help compensate for a blue-green (cyan) wall behind the TV (color correcting the wall to make it appear neutral). However, if the rest of the room lighting being used is also incandescent, the wall paint chosen would already have had so much color saturation as to still appear cyan under similar lighting.

Any attempt at accurately color correcting wall paint with lighting or filters would be a daunting task for most consumers. Without a sufficient understanding of color space and/or proper instrumentation, such a task would only present a best guess proposition. It's my approach that a more reasonable and simple method is to suggest a neutral surround for the display with high CRI 6500K (or actual D65) bias lighting.


Our lower cost solutions are not D65. Such color accuracy is more expensive to achieve. A high color rendering 6500K fluorescent may not be as technically precise, but still a much better solution than most other lighting in typical rooms.


Actually red+blue in illuminant color space produces magenta.


He asked for guidance in selecting a proper alternative to my specific solutions. Any alternative would be best based upon the same imaging science principles. The SMPTE recommendations for ambient lighting in a monitor environment are the basis for all my products. Fulfilling those recommendations can be achieved with other products as long as the same principles are understood and intelligently applied. I believe your observations and our debate are right in line with syphon00's original question. However, he may be reading far more than he expected to.

I was an imaging science advocate and videophile/hobbyist long before I became a manufacturer. My advocacy is firstly intended to inform about and promote imaging excellence. That benefits us all. I'll let others promote compromise where they deem it specifically useful or appropriate.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"