or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Video Processors › Lumagen Vision 24p fixup release to include gamut control
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lumagen Vision 24p fixup release to include gamut control - Page 3

post #61 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyFreeman View Post

We issued a RMA for the return of this LumagenHDP. We received the unit this morning and found that a component needed to be changed. We repaired the unit and will ship it back to the customer this afternoon.

Best regards,
Randy Freeman

Randy--

It sounds as if I also have this random white streaking issue. I had not done an update since October of 2006, and this just recently started happening out of the blue. I then DID do the most recent firmware upgrade, swapped cables, did troubleshooting of every possible solution.

At this point, my best guess is that I have the same "bad" component needing repair. How do I go about getting this to happen?

Thanks for your time and attention to this matter!
post #62 of 736
Please send an email to support@lumagen.com and request a RMA number to return your unit for repair.

Best regards,
Randy Freeman
post #63 of 736
I am using 1080p/24 input, but my projector only accepts 1080p/60. Do I need to update to this new software version?

Thanks.

Mark
post #64 of 736
We expect that many (or even most) customers will continue to use software rev 032507 for their Lumagen DVI, HDP, or HDQ. The mode 1080p24 input to 1080p48 or 1080p60 output works very well. The newer software fixes a studder that some people saw using 1080p24 input to 1080p24 output. We also added a basic CMS system that allows you to change the position of the primary colors.

Best regards,
Randy Freeman
post #65 of 736
My HD-XA2 will not switch to 1080/24p while connected to my HDQ. Is there something in the input settings that I need to change in order to get 1080/24p? I can select 1080/24p while watching SAT or a DVD but I can't get the XA2 to switch to 24p output. Remove the HDQ and go directly to my JVC RS1 and 1080/24p works great. What am I doing wrong?

Ron
post #66 of 736
Select the DVI input on the Lumagen that is connected to your HD-XA2. Choose the User EDID in the Lumagen and turn off all the resolutions except for 1080p24. Press "Menu, IN, CONFIG, DVI, EDID, USER, OK". Finally cycle the power on the HD-XA2 so that it will read the EDID in the Lumagen. Save the the new settings on the Lumagen by pressing "Menu, Save, Ok, Ok, Ok".

Best regards,
Randy Freeman
post #67 of 736
Thanks Randy!

That works OK! I find that once I am watching a movie in 1080/24p that if I switch to a different input and then go back to the XA2 in 1080/24p the video is running way faster and the audio is lagging way behind. Sometimes the video looks like it is in fast forward yet the audio is not. I also sometimes lose the picture completely when i change inputs while the XA2 is in playback upon my return to the XA2. So this works but I must not change inputs while I am using the XA2 set in 1080/24p bypass. Also if I select the menu the image judders while the menu is up but goes away when I exit the menu. I can also get the audio and video back in sync by jumping to another chapter on the disc.

Ron
post #68 of 736
One more question! Does the HDQ bypass if I set input to 1080i and output 1080i or does full bypass only work with progressive video? Example: 1080p in and 1080p out with scale in bypass or 720p in and 720p out with scale in bypass.
post #69 of 736
Big THANK YOU to Lumagen for providing this feature. My Lumagen VisionPro HDP is now giving extremely good gamut correction results on my RS1, as shown in this post.

--Dan
post #70 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhnjp1 View Post

Big THANK YOU to Lumagen for providing this feature. My Lumagen VisionPro HDP is now giving extremely good gamut correction results on my RS1, as shown in this post.

To quantify the improvement, what are the xyY data on the RS1 with the -10 color setting with the HDP out of the loop?
post #71 of 736
Odd that the RS1 color control has little effect on Y for green:
Code:
DTP94 probe
Gamut Correction OFF, RS1 color=-10
                               Rec709   SMPTE-C
          x       y       Y      dE      dE        dLuma
R       0.6600  0.3370  0.2116   4.3    11.5     -10.98%
G       0.2900  0.7030  0.6937  29.4    33.7      -2.40%
B       0.1450  0.0390  0.0435   6.8    13.5     -15.66%
Y       0.4420  0.5510  0.9376   1.3     1.3      -1.14%
C       0.2080  0.3270  0.7455   1.2     1.2      -2.21%
M       0.3240  0.1420  0.2638   5.7     5.7      -8.79%

Gamut Correction ON, RS1 color=-10
                               Rec709   SMPTE-C
          x       y       Y      dE      dE       dLuma
R       0.6340  0.3310  0.2085   5.0     7.7     -1.01%
G       0.3060  0.5980  0.7380   3.1     3.7      2.52%
B       0.1490  0.0580  0.0700   2.1    10.6      0.56%
Y       0.4030  0.4830  0.9749  10.1    10.1      4.78%
C       0.2290  0.3310  0.7963   1.8     1.8      0.88%
M       0.3160  0.1660  0.3198   9.1     9.1     14.1%
It's not as perfect as the Radiance, but I'd say it's an overall improvement over the stock RS1. The increased error in Y,M is much smaller than the improvement in G. And the secondary errors are much less obvious, since yellow isn't shifted toward green or red. Flesh tones look perfect to me. I can see the yellow test pattern is undersaturated, but in real video it would be hard to notice unless you did a side-by-side.

--Dan
post #72 of 736
I can't share your enthusiasm.

The improvement in average dE was only 2.9 and much of that was due to reduced lightness errors in red and blue, which you could have achieved without the gamut adjustment. Green was greatly improved, but red, yellow, and magenta were made worse.
post #73 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

I can't share your enthusiasm.

The improvement in average dE was only 2.9 and much of that was due to reduced lightness errors in red and blue, which you could have achieved without the gamut adjustment. Green was greatly improved, but red, yellow, and magenta were made worse.

Tom,

Dan's numbers show lighter red and blue without gamut correction turned on. With it turned on the levels are restored.

I think the comparison should be with color set to zero and no gamut adjustment and then -10 color with gamut turned on.

These settings don't work for my RS1 though. It might be because Dan's RS1 has a new bulb. It screws up my Yellow and Cyan more than Magenta and lower IRE's track all over the place due to the unbalanced settings in the gamut control.
post #74 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronomy View Post

Dan's numbers show lighter red and blue without gamut correction turned on. With it turned on the levels are restored.

I think the comparison should be with color set to zero and no gamut adjustment and then -10 color with gamut turned on.

These settings don't work for my RS1 though. It might be because Dan's RS1 has a new bulb. It screws up my Yellow and Cyan more than Magenta and lower IRE's track all over the place due to the unbalanced settings in the gamut control.

Gamut Off
Red: 0.2116
Blue: 0.0435

Gamut On
Red: 0.2085
Blue: 0.700

No, red's lightness is barely changed at all (about 1.5%) and blue's lightness is significantly darker (61%) without the gamut correction.

If you made a comparison between
1) the Gamut on and the Color control at -10
and,
2) the Gamut off and the Color control at 0

then you would not be testing the Gamut control. It would be a test of the Gamut control plus other variables. Just turning the Color control down by itself reduces the color error to some degree. The question is what additional benefit does the gamut control offer.

Very, very little, as every measurement of this has shown.
post #75 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Gamut Off
Red: 0.2116
Blue: 0.0435

Gamut On
Red: 0.2085
Blue: 0.700

No, red's lightness is barely changed at all (about 1.5%) and blue's lightness is significantly darker (61%) without the gamut correction.

If you made a comparison between
1) the Gamut on and the Color control at -10
and,
2) the Gamut off and the Color control at 0

then you would not be testing the Gamut control. It would be a test of the Gamut control plus other variables. Just turning the Color control down by itself reduces the color error to some degree. The question is what additional benefit does the gamut control offer.

Very, very little, as every measurement of this has shown.

Tom you really are unreasonable! It is very visible that the colors are better. Just no talking to you it doesn't do any good.
post #76 of 736
Tom has been wrong about this every step of the way. No reason to think that he would change his opinion now.

First he said you can't balance the primaries without screwing up the secondaries.

When it was demonstrated that that could be done he said well you guys are just screwing up the Luma.

Now that the Luma is mostly fixed and all the colors are balanced he says that all we had to do was turn the color control on the RS1 down!

This guy is a piece of work.
post #77 of 736
It would be fun to see the two big ego's (my way or the highway) argue on this one:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...4#post13034484
post #78 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

Tom has been wrong about this every step of the way. No reason to think that he would change his opinion now.

First he said you can't balance the primaries without screwing up the secondaries.

When it was demonstrated that that could be done he said well you guys are just screwing up the Luma.

Now that the Luma is mostly fixed and all the colors are balanced he says that all we had to do was turn the color control on the RS1 down!

This guy is a piece of work.

You know it would be so much better if you actually took the time to know what you were talking about before posting on it.

Read this this really slowly.

1) Using the controls as they were intended to be used to desaturate the primaries to the proper amount also desaturates and overly brightens the secondaries.

2) Seeing this, you guys starting experimenting using the color decoding adjustments to mitigate this effect. This worked to the extent that it desaturated the secondaries less, but now it created another problem. It screwed up the luma. This is not surprising because you are using the controls in a way they were not intended to be used.

3) I never said "all we had to do was turn the color control on the RS1 down!" You just made this up. Reading is a really useful skill. You really ought to try it. I wrote "Just turning the Color control down by itself reduces the color error to some degree." This statement, by the way, is true (not that this matters to you of course) and perfectly consistent with everything I have written on this subject.

Resorting to personal attacks is really the lowest form communication. I have been perfectly respectful in my discussions of this subject but because what I have written conflicts with your deep desire to celebrate your purchase, it obviously enrages you to read a contrary point of view.

And BTW, not only have I NOT been "wrong about this every step of the way" I haven't been wrong about anything that I have written on this subject that I'm aware of and there's certainly nothing in this infantile rant of yours that shows otherwise.
post #79 of 736
I've been out all day, so won't get to post new results until tomorrow night.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Gamut Off
Red: 0.2116

Gamut On
Red: 0.2085

No, red's lightness is barely changed at all (about 1.5%) and blue's lightness is significantly darker (61%) without the gamut correction.

Tom, I do appreciate your insight and expertise, and your spreadsheet. I hope you continue to comment here.

While red's absolute Y barely changed, the luma target generated by your spreadsheet depends on the primaries xy location, which is why the luma error is reduced. Without gamut changing xy, the luma error would remain.

I'm not sure just what exactly the RS1 color control affects. But I have to disagree when you say the lightness errors can be eliminated without the gamut controls. RS1 color=0 has blue down -20%. RS1 color=-10 brings red down as well. There is no way to get correct luma for R,G,B at 100IRE on a stock RS1, and maintain D65 grayscale.

The numbers in my post were not targeting REC709 exactly. I was experiementing with a compromise between REC709 and SMPTE-C. When I target exact REC709, I can easily get R,G,B,C < 2.0dE, but M,Y are still around 10. Stock RS1 (color=0) has M dE=8, so only the Y error is visible.

Ron, etc., I think the difference in our secondaries (cyan is always perfect for me) is not caused by the new bulb, but by different test patterns. I only use external patterns (AVS HD709) and you guys use the Lumagen internal patterns. I don't trust the internal patterns, as there has been a bug before where the color controls caused the patterns to change. Even Lumagen recommends using external patterns. I've recently noticed a change between measuring real-time while still in the gamut menu after changing a value, vs. measuring after clicking on OK and exiting. It's almost like some update happens in a spreadsheet.

--Dan
post #80 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronomy View Post

Tom you really are unreasonable! It is very visible that the colors are better. Just no talking to you it doesn't do any good.

Ron, you and I are talking past one another. You appear to be operating exclusively on the level of subjective impressions, which OK as far as it goes. But since I can't see what you see, all I have to go on is the data. And the data has been remarkably consistent. Your subjective impressions simply aren't consistent with the data.

You obviously really don't like it that I keep pointing this out, but why doing so is "unreasonable" is beyond me. Why I object to a methodology that includes independent variables unrelated to the equipment you are testing is "unreasonable" is also mysterious. This is junior high school science for god sakes. If you want to test X's effect on Y, then keep all other variables the same and just change X to see its effect on Y. Do I really have to explain this?

I don't keep writing this stuff just because I like it. I keep writing it because that's what the data keeps saying. You show me some data that shows otherwise, and I'll happily change my mind.
post #81 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhnjp1 View Post

I've been out all day, so won't get to post new results until tomorrow night.
Tom, I do appreciate your insight and expertise, and your spreadsheet. I hope you continue to comment here.

Dan: Thanks. It's nice that someone does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dhnjp1 View Post

While red's absolute Y barely changed, the luma target generated by your spreadsheet depends on the primaries xy location, which is why the luma error is reduced. Without gamut changing xy, the luma error would remain.

Gotcha. That makes sense. I was responding to Ron's claim that "Dan's numbers show lighter red and blue without gamut correction turned on" and not to a claim about the reduction in luma error, which as you correctly point out is something else entirely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dhnjp1 View Post

I'm not sure just what exactly the S1 color control affects. But I have to disagree when you say the lightness errors can be eliminated without the gamut controls. RS1 color=0 has blue down -20%. RS1 color=-10 brings red down as well. There is no way to get correct luma for R,G,B at 100IRE on a stock RS1, and maintain D65 grayscale.

What I meant was that the OTHER controls in the HDP can be used to correct the luma errors. The HDP has had a Red Color and Green Color adjustment for some time. Using these in concert with the PJ's color control should allow you adjust out the luma errors. For this, you don't need the new Gamut controls.
post #82 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by reincarnate View Post

It would be fun to see the two big ego's (my way or the highway) argue on this one:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...4#post13034484

I don't usually respond to your posts because I make it a policy to ignore dedicated Internet trolls, but this requires an exception.

The post you refer to is more than 3 months old and clearly was a reaction to the announcement of the feature in advance of actually testing it.

If you had searched a little harder (I mean, this is what you do, right?), you would have found that I posted something very similar.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post13003459
post #83 of 736
"Tom, I do appreciate your insight and expertise, and your spreadsheet. I hope you continue to comment here.
Dan: Thanks. It's nice that someone does."

I think that goes for a lot of us. Please keep up your informative posts.

Kevin
post #84 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

You know it would be so much better if you actually took the time to know what you were talking about before posting on it.

Read this this really slowly.

1) Using the controls as they were intended to be used to desaturate the primaries to the proper amount also desaturates and overly brightens the secondaries.

2) Seeing this, you guys starting experimenting using the color decoding adjustments to mitigate this effect. This worked to the extent that it desaturated the secondaries less, but now it created another problem. It screwed up the luma. This is not surprising because you are using the controls in a way they were not intended to be used.

3) I never said "all we had to do was turn the color control on the RS1 down!" You just made this up. Reading is a really useful skill. You really ought to try it. I wrote "Just turning the Color control down by itself reduces the color error to some degree." This statement, by the way, is true (not that this matters to you of course) and perfectly consistent with everything I have written on this subject.

Resorting to personal attacks is really the lowest form communication. I have been perfectly respectful in my discussions of this subject but because what I have written conflicts with your deep desire to celebrate your purchase, it obviously enrages you to read a contrary point of view.

And BTW, not only have I NOT been "wrong about this every step of the way" I haven't been wrong about anything that I have written on this subject that I'm aware of and there's certainly nothing in this infantile rant of yours that shows otherwise.


Tom,

You talk about reading carefully and then you state that I have personally attacked you? I disagree. What I have attacked is your interpretation of the data. If personal attacks are the lowest form of communication what does that say about your comments that I "have a deep desire to celebrate [my] purchase" and then going on to suggest that I am "enrage[d]" about reading a contrary point of view.

If anything, I am perplexed. The results are so compelling that there has been an objectively measureable improvement in PQ as compared to standards, that commentary like yours seems just flat out wrong.

Might I suggest something? You speak of us testing a piece of equipment and point to the fact that certain improvements are unrelated to the Vision. Do you think that it is possible that you missed the point? We are not testing a piece of equipment. Rather, we are using all of the controls that are available to us to try to make the RS1's colors more accurate. The Vison is one of those controls. I don't think that there has been a post that has not at least implied that we are working around the Vision's limitations. The question is, have we been successful in doing so?

I know what my before measurements look like and I know what my current measurements look like. By any measure, there has been substantial overall improvement as reflected in much lower dEs for each color, with some colors that are close to perfect.

I had hoped at one point that you would be an active participant in this and even thought that you might have some constructive suggestions about things that could be tried to improve the final result. I now see that those hopes were misplaced.
post #85 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Ron, you and I are talking past one another. You appear to be operating exclusively on the level of subjective impressions, which OK as far as it goes. But since I can't see what you see, all I have to go on is the data. And the data has been remarkably consistent. Your subjective impressions simply aren't consistent with the data.

You obviously really don't like it that I keep pointing this out, but why doing so is "unreasonable" is beyond me. Why I object to a methodology that includes independent variables unrelated to the equipment you are testing is "unreasonable" is also mysterious. This is junior high school science for god sakes. If you want to test X's effect on Y, then keep all other variables the same and just change X to see its effect on Y. Do I really have to explain this?

I don't keep writing this stuff just because I like it. I keep writing it because that's what the data keeps saying. You show me some data that shows otherwise, and I'll happily change my mind.

Tom,

It's the way you post sometimes. Blunt answers that come across harsh. I don't want you to stop posting your thoughts either. You have a lot of experience with calibrations and us novices look for direction from you and other ISF guys. I guess I am looking for more open minded answers rather than you slamming all our efforts.

Ron
post #86 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

You talk about reading carefully and then you state that I have personally attacked you? I disagree.

You do this all the time. You write something neither very helpful nor very civil and then when called on it you immediately deny it. Just how is one supposed to interpret "This guy is a piece of work" other than a completely personal attack in response to a purely technical discussion? Disagree all you want, but it is there in black and white for everyone to read. What I wrote was only in defense of that shot across my bow. I reserve the right to defend myself when confronted with this type of incivility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

What I have attacked is your interpretation of the data. If personal attacks are the lowest form of communication what does that say about your comments that I "have a deep desire to celebrate [my] purchase" and then going on to suggest that I am "enrage[d]" about reading a contrary point of view.

The data are just numbers. There is no room for "interpretation." The numbers are the numbers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

If anything, I am perplexed. The results are so compelling that there has been an objectively measureable improvement in PQ as compared to standards, that commentary like yours seems just flat out wrong.

Might I suggest something? You speak of us testing a piece of equipment and point to the fact that certain improvements are unrelated to the Vision. Do you think that it is possible that you missed the point? We are not testing a piece of equipment. Rather, we are using all of the controls that are available to us to try to make the RS1's colors more accurate. The Vison is one of those controls. I don't think that there has been a post that has not at least implied that we are working around the Vision's limitations. The question is, have we been successful in doing so?

Gee, I don't think I missed the point. Insofar as the title of this thread is "Lumagen Vision 24p fixup release to include gamut control", I assumed you guys were talking about Lumagen Vision's gamut control.

If that is not what you are talking about, but instead your point is that by using a broad range of strategies--including the reducing the Color control on the RS1 and using the controls on the Vision OTHER than the gamut control--you can reduce the color errors on the RS1, then I have no argument with that. I never did. But there is nothing new here. This has been known for a long time. The only thing that has changed is that you've finally gotten around to trying to measure this stuff and address it seriously, AND Lumagen released this gamut control thingy, which I thought was what all the fuss was about. What I have been keen to emphasize is that unless used very selectively and carefully, the gamut control adds very little in addition to what was already available. I want consumers to be aware of that. I think that it is important.

I think, and I have written more than once, that the Vision processors offer a nice value. Their color decoding and gamma/gray scale controls work fabulously. But if I am being honest, I also have to point out that the gamut control does not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawguy View Post

I had hoped at one point that you would be an active participant in this and even thought that you might have some constructive suggestions about things that could be tried to improve the final result. I now see that those hopes were misplaced.

I have made several constructive suggestions. I have suggested that if you use use the gamut control, you should use it on one primary only to minimize the effects on the secondaries. I have suggested that you not use color decoding controls to address errors in saturation. I have suggested that if you are really interested in color correction that you consider springing for the Radiance, which offers a CMS that works exactly as advertised. While we are on the subject, it would be useful to provide pre-calibration numbers (all adjustments zeroed out) so we can have a baseline against which to judge your efforts.
post #87 of 736
Ooookaaayyyyy.... think I'll step back to the "other" Lumagen/RS-1 thread... a much more constructive and useful place. I see this has devolved.
post #88 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronomy View Post

It's the way you post sometimes. Blunt answers that come across harsh. I don't want you to stop posting your thoughts either. You have a lot of experience with calibrations and us novices look for direction from you and other ISF guys. I guess I am looking for more open minded answers rather than you slamming all our efforts.

Ron, as I said in my previous post, I really think that this is really a case of two people talking past one another. Your primary concern has been to minimize the RS1 color errors, using any technique available. This is exactly as it should be. In this regard you have used a broad range of strategies to cut the errors in about half, though it is kind of hard to tell exactly in absence of pre-calibration numbers.

My interest has been different. I have been keen to alert consumers to some serious flaws in the Vision's gamut control. I was intent on ensuring that no one get the wrong impression about what it was and was not capable of achieving.

Yes, I am blunt, which is not the same thing as harsh. If you took anything that I wrote as personal, believe me that I did not intend it that way.
post #89 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by erkq View Post

Ooookaaayyyyy.... think I'll step back to the "other" Lumagen/RS-1 thread... a much more constructive and useful place. I see this has devolved.

I think it is only a temporary blip. . . .not permanent devolution.
post #90 of 736
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

I think it is only a temporary blip. . . .not permanent devolution.

Thanks for the encouragement. You all seem like decent people.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Video Processors › Lumagen Vision 24p fixup release to include gamut control