Projector Mini-Shootout Thread - Page 570 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 5024Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #17071 of 19605 Old 07-01-2017, 01:08 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 28,575
Mentioned: 289 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14023 Post(s)
Liked: 11690
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
Just out of curiosity, is it not possible to calibrate it for 0.005 to be black, and "enable" the fade to black? Or have you just chosen not to, in favor of a "correct" calibration with 0.000 being black?

Reason I ask is because a number of us with RSxx0's have found that there's really no loss of shadow detail with a 0.005 black calibration.
UHD BD fade to black looks like a full fade to black, but there is a tiny bit of light coming out of the lens. Would like it to be like the BD version, when you get full fade to black, zero light comes out of the projector.
Mike Garrett is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17072 of 19605 Old 07-01-2017, 04:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
Apgood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 542
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonichart View Post
From what I can gather between the X9S and Zappiti, bot have exactly the same processors and memory. Both using the Mali™-T820 MP3 (3 Core) GPU.

Only thing that isn't clear on the X9S website is if it has HDMI 2.0 like the Zappiti.

Honestly if the Duo comes with a rackmount kit its going to be hard to pass up. From the pictures it has the edge with UI as well.
Zidoo website does say that it can do 4k at 60p, 10bit, bt2020, hdcp 2.2 and HDR. According to reports on the Kodi forums it can playback UHD Bluray rips as well, but until we can backup our own discs I think that one is largely moot.

I think the biggest difference between the two is the housing and the 10ft interface they use.
Apgood is online now  
post #17073 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 12:07 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zombie10k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 13,234
Mentioned: 187 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5684 Post(s)
Liked: 6272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
My home theater I am trying to emulate a movie theater, not a flatscreen TV - and a movie theater is max 2000:1 native on/off contrast by law so people don't fall over themselves in the dark.

i saw this posted in the other thread. a law for low native - is it safe to say this was a light hearted joke? I leave the local theaters all the time disappointed with the low APL performance of the Cinema DLP projectors at the various theaters in my area. The same content looks considerably better at home in a light treated room.

last night I was watching the BD re-master of Leon (UHD HDR due out 7/11). I watched clips on several different DLP's starting with my lowest native contrast ~1000:1, then another at 2000:1, .95 DC4 Planar ~ 3500:1 and then the RS600 @ -11 on the iris 100K:1.

we wouldn't need any double blind tests to figure out the order, it's quite obvious in my room.

The DLP's definitely have their home here though. LG PF1500 for TV viewing, dual Sharp 30K's for excellent 3D and the Planar is great for gaming, very low lag time. The RS600 is the 'movie' projector though for critical viewing of quality BD & UHD sources.
humbland, rak306, Ericglo and 2 others like this.
zombie10k is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17074 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 09:29 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 12,505
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4008 Post(s)
Liked: 2333
He must have edited it, because I don't see the post. If he truly believes that there is a law for low native contrast, then I would like for him to produce a link.

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is offline  
post #17075 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 09:39 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2595
He was trying to insinuate that there was some sort of "law" that states contrast must only be 2000:1 so that people can see in dark theaters to make their way in to and out without injuring themselves. He must have edited that part out. That's a ridiculous claim especially now that we've had commercial Sony SXRD projectors doing ~8000:1 for at least a decade now and we also have Dolby Vision DLP projectors doing quite literally over 100,000:1 in commercial theaters. In the Dolby Vision theaters at least, they've specifically designed floor guide and ambient lights within the theater so they bleed as little as possible on screen while still maintaining safe conditions so that people aren't walking literally in the dark. All of this is achieved and still gives plenty of on screen contrast. His claim on this (and other things) is preposterous and I hope you guys won't get tired of correcting him on the forum in the various threads he posts in, because people should not buy into his claims. They're pure misinformation and will lead easily fooled people into believing falsehoods.
DavidHir likes this.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #17076 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 10:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,859
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2643 Post(s)
Liked: 1273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
He was trying to insinuate that there was some sort of "law" that states contrast must only be 2000:1 so that people can see in dark theaters to make their way in to and out without injuring themselves. He must have edited that part out. That's a ridiculous claim especially now that we've had commercial Sony SXRD projectors doing ~8000:1 for at least a decade now and we also have Dolby Vision DLP projectors doing quite literally over 100,000:1 in commercial theaters. In the Dolby Vision theaters at least, they've specifically designed floor guide and ambient lights within the theater so they bleed as little as possible on screen while still maintaining safe conditions so that people aren't walking literally in the dark. All of this is achieved and still gives plenty of on screen contrast. His claim on this (and other things) is preposterous and I hope you guys won't get tired of correcting him on the forum in the various threads he posts in, because people should not buy into his claims. They're pure misinformation and will lead easily fooled people into believing falsehoods.
Comedy gold Seegs, comedy gold. Please don't stop being you!

Theaters need to keep ambient light relatively high as a result of regional safety regulations and just plain common sense, so yes people can see when trying to exit or enter a theater. Imagine 100% dark black theater and an emergency occurring... People would be stampeded, hurt, and the theater chain sued for negligence (and they would lose).

As a result of the high ambient light - which generally gets reflected by the screen - the effective contrast ratio often becomes quite limited in theaters. Taking this into consideration, the industry standard for digital cinema projector contrast was set at 2000:1 a long time ago partially to accommodate the realistic limitations on contrast the required ambient light for safety causes. This is why the majority of professional cinema projectors are spec'd at 2000:1 contrast. Ambient light negates a super high contrast ratio in most theaters and theaters are required to maintain ambient light per the regional safety regulations, which vary.
Ruined is offline  
post #17077 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 11:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
humbland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,720
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombie10k View Post
i saw this posted in the other thread. a law for low native - is it safe to say this was a light hearted joke? I leave the local theaters all the time disappointed with the low APL performance of the Cinema DLP projectors at the various theaters in my area. The same content looks considerably better at home in a light treated room.

last night I was watching the BD re-master of Leon (UHD HDR due out 7/11). I watched clips on several different DLP's starting with my lowest native contrast ~1000:1, then another at 2000:1, .95 DC4 Planar ~ 3500:1 and then the RS600 @ -11 on the iris 100K:1.

we wouldn't need any double blind tests to figure out the order, it's quite obvious in my room.

The DLP's definitely have their home here though. LG PF1500 for TV viewing, dual Sharp 30K's for excellent 3D and the Planar is great for gaming, very low lag time. The RS600 is the 'movie' projector though for critical viewing of quality BD & UHD sources.
Zombie, Did you mean Leon "The Professional"? It's one of my all time favorite films. The (2015) 10 year anniversary Blu-ray edition has a great Atmos sound track. Also, some excellent commentary from the director and cast. For $10, it's a must have.

https://www.amazon.com/Professional-...=UTF8&qid=&sr=

BTW, where does the Sharp Z30K fall in your (purely contrast) projector hierarchy? With one iris activated and Darbee at HD 55%, the contrast on our HP 2.8 looks excellent. Plus the DLP image is tack Sharp (PJ humor)
humbland is online now  
post #17078 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 11:06 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2595
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post
Zombie, Did you mean Leon "The Professional"? It's one of my all time favorite films. The (2015) 10 year anniversary Blu-ray edition has a great Atmos sound track. Also, some excellent commentary from the director and cast. For $10, it's a must have.

https://www.amazon.com/Professional-...=UTF8&qid=&sr=

BTW, where does the Sharp Z30K fall in your purely contrast hierarchy? With one iris activated and Darbee at HD 55%, the contrast on our HP 2.8 looks excellent. Plus the DLP image is tack Sharp (PJ humor)
I'm not Zombie, but as I remember it, the Z30K fell just a little shy in dynamic contrast performance compared to the PD8150. I would say the DI on the PD8150 is a little less visible in it's action however. The Z30k was, by far, the best .65" 1080p DLP projector I've had the pleasure of owning and the only single chip DLP projector I thought offered a better image was the PD8150, but the overall difference is not all that large. Plus the Z30K provides excellent 3D, which the PD8150 does not.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #17079 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 11:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
humbland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,720
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
I'm not Zombie, but as I remember it, the Z30K fell just a little shy in dynamic contrast performance compared to the PD8150. I would say the DI on the PD8150 is a little less visible in it's action however. The Z30k was, by far, the best .65" 1080p DLP projector I've had the pleasure of owning and the only single chip DLP projector I thought offered a better image was the PD8150, but the overall difference is not all that large. Plus the Z30K provides excellent 3D, which the PD8150 does not.
Thanks Seegs.
Like you, I'm a huge DLP fan. I've waited a long time for TI and the DLP makers to get into the 4K game.
From following recent developments, my best guess is that Benq will be the one to step up to the plate with a competitive HT offering. However, sadly it will probably not be for another couple of years.
humbland is online now  
post #17080 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 11:19 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2595
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post
Thanks Seegs.
Like you, I'm a huge DLP fan. I've waited a long time for TI and the DLP makers to get into the 4K game.
From following recent developments, my best guess is that Benq will be the one to step up to the plate with a competitive HT offering. However, sadly it will probably not be for another couple of years.
Based on what I saw from the UHD65, the Z30K easily bests it in terms of overall image quality. If you're looking for an upgrade I would wait and see how the Vivitek HK2288 turns out. It's a little on the pricey side at $3500, but it may be the only DLP competition I've seen announced for your Z30K. I have serious doubts as to how the UHZ65 will turn out. Vivitek makes very solid performing projectors. Their parent/sister company Delta OEMs the best DLP consumer based projectors out there. Your Z30K has a Delta OEM light engine inside it.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #17081 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 11:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,859
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2643 Post(s)
Liked: 1273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
Feel free to provide a source for this. I look forward to reading all about this. Who needs safety lighting around the theater when you can just keep the black level high enough to illuminate the whole theater instead? I'm sure Sony has received a ton of lawsuits for going way above the 2000:1 law. A lot of injuries and broken bones must have happened.
It appears you did not fully read my post, let me just quote it so I don't have to retype the same thing again:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined
Theaters need to keep ambient light relatively high as a result of regional safety regulations and just plain common sense, so yes people can see when trying to exit or enter a theater. Imagine 100% dark black theater and an emergency occurring... People would be stampeded, hurt, and the theater chain sued for negligence (and they would lose).

As a result of the high ambient light - which generally gets reflected by the screen - the effective contrast ratio often becomes quite limited in theaters. Taking this into consideration, the industry standard for digital cinema projector contrast was set at 2000:1 a long time ago partially to accommodate the realistic limitations on contrast the required ambient light for safety causes. This is why the majority of professional cinema projectors are spec'd at 2000:1 contrast. Ambient light negates a super high contrast ratio in most theaters and theaters are required to maintain ambient light per the regional safety regulations, which vary.
And, although its not really that exciting, here is I believe the applicable chapter of NYC building code, for an example of regional safety regulations:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dob/download...ode/bc27s8.pdf
Ruined is offline  
post #17082 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 11:33 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
It appears you did not fully read my post, let me just quote it so I don't have to retype the same thing again:



And, although its not really that exciting, here is I believe the applicable chapter of NYC building code, for an example of regional safety regulations:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dob/download...ode/bc27s8.pdf
On screen on/off contrast can be way higher than 2000:1 even with the ambient light I've seen at my local commercial cinemas. Again, the Sony SXRD projectors are easily visibly better at these theaters. Each theater at my local multiplexes have the same light setup but do vary in what type of projector is in each. Some have Christie DLP and others have Sony SXRD and the Sony wins in contrast by a decent margin, so I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The 2000:1 number you're quoting has everything to do with limitations with the technology behind the projector, not some kind of ambient light restrictions. I remember when I was younger going to see 35mm film in theaters there was far more contrast on screen despite there being ambient light in the theater. The notion that TI is somehow holding back potential contrast performance because there might be excessive ambient light in the theater is ridiculous.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #17083 of 19605 Old 07-02-2017, 11:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
humbland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,720
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
Based on what I saw from the UHD65, the Z30K easily bests it in terms of overall image quality. If you're looking for an upgrade I would wait and see how the Vivitek HK2288 turns out. It's a little on the pricey side at $3500, but it may be the only DLP competition I've seen announced for your Z30K. I have serious doubts as to how the UHZ65 will turn out. Vivitek makes very solid performing projectors. Their parent/sister company Delta OEMs the best DLP consumer based projectors out there. Your Z30K has a Delta OEM light engine inside it.
With our cathedral ceiling mount (low earth orbit), we need powered lens controls. Does the new Vivitek have powered controls?
humbland is online now  
post #17084 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 04:25 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 12,505
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4008 Post(s)
Liked: 2333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
It appears you did not fully read my post, let me just quote it so I don't have to retype the same thing again:



And, although its not really that exciting, here is I believe the applicable chapter of NYC building code, for an example of regional safety regulations:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dob/download...ode/bc27s8.pdf
Could you point me to the subsection that states the 2000 to 1 cr?

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is offline  
post #17085 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 04:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frank714's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Berlin
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 974 Post(s)
Liked: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post
With our cathedral ceiling mount (low earth orbit), we need powered lens controls. Does the new Vivitek have powered controls?

No. just manual lens shift according to the icon on the casing near the lens with a range of 5%-15% offset correction (native offset is 115%).

"It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always absolutely valueless." Oscar Wilde
Frank714 is offline  
post #17086 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 06:56 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 23,130
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4156 Post(s)
Liked: 2390
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post
...my best guess is that Benq will be the one to step up to the plate with a competitive HT offering.
Why is that? When has BenQ ever done such a thing? BenQ's forte has always been bringing decent performance at a lower price point, never pushing the performance boundary. Just look back the PE8700, W10000, W9000, were some of the best projectors they've made, all offered decent performance, but were less expensive than the top performers. For example at the W10000 was popular because it was half the price of the Sharp Z20000, and offered good performance. But it was also substantially lower contrast, 4200:1 according to Secrets for the BenQ vs over 9000:1 according to S&V for the Sharp.

So who's going to step up? I'm not sure, Delta seems to be the top OEM, having built the Planar 8150/Runco LS5 and a number of other top machines. Sim2 also has a history of pushing performance boundaries (though not a recent history). The question is, is anybody going to contract Delta to make a machine that pushes, boundaries? And what would such a machine have to cost?
stanger89 is offline  
post #17087 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 08:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Gary Lightfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 6,434
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1303 Post(s)
Liked: 1057
I remember reading a spec somewhere that said the sequential CR should not be less than 2000:1, so I did a search and found this:

http://www.giantscreencinema.com/Por...-a%2011-17.pdf

But I'm sure there are other similar sources if you search for it. I might have an old DCI spec pdf with it in somewhere, so I might try and find it.

Another google found this:

http://www.edcf.net/edcf_docs/DCI%20...cs%20final.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc
Who says Cameron is "right" and why do we care about him so much - lol!

I trust Gary Lightfoot more than James Cameron.

Last edited by Gary Lightfoot; 07-03-2017 at 08:26 AM.
Gary Lightfoot is offline  
post #17088 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 09:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
humbland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,720
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1176 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanger89 View Post
Why is that? When has BenQ ever done such a thing? BenQ's forte has always been bringing decent performance at a lower price point, never pushing the performance boundary. Just look back the PE8700, W10000, W9000, were some of the best projectors they've made, all offered decent performance, but were less expensive than the top performers. For example at the W10000 was popular because it was half the price of the Sharp Z20000, and offered good performance. But it was also substantially lower contrast, 4200:1 according to Secrets for the BenQ vs over 9000:1 according to S&V for the Sharp.

So who's going to step up? I'm not sure, Delta seems to be the top OEM, having built the Planar 8150/Runco LS5 and a number of other top machines. Sim2 also has a history of pushing performance boundaries (though not a recent history). The question is, is anybody going to contract Delta to make a machine that pushes, boundaries? And what would such a machine have to cost?
When I got started in FP, my first PJ was a Benq PE8720. It was recommended to me by Art at PR.com (who also had one).
At the time it was about $4.5K and was sharper and darker than almost anything you could find for <$10K. It had powered controls and was, INMO, a gem. Ever since then, I've had a soft spot for DLP.
JVC, Sony and others have raised the bar. I was sad to see Sharp give up on the FP game. The Z30K seemed like a great jumping off place to 4K...
In any case, Benq has not been a mid tier "player" for a while. I have a hunch that they are poised to get back in. At least I hope so.
humbland is online now  
post #17089 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 12:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
rak306's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Syracuse NY
Posts: 993
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 618 Post(s)
Liked: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
.. Taking this into consideration, the industry standard for digital cinema projector contrast was set at 2000:1 a long time ago partially to accommodate the realistic limitations on contrast the required ambient light for safety causes. ...
This is from the (no longer current) DCI rev 1.0 spec:

For theatrical environments, the ambient light level reflected by the screen is encouraged to be less than 0.03 cd/m2 (.01 ft-L). Safety regulations and the placement of exit lights or access lights can result in a higher ambient light level. But, it is noted that this will reduce the contrast of the projected image.


The current DCI spec references "SMPTE RP 431-2: D-Cinema Quality - Reference Projector and Environment", which costs $ to get your hands on, so I don't know what it says.

Notice the ambient light is supposed to be less than this amount, not at least this amount.
rak306 is offline  
post #17090 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 01:56 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darinp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,735
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 543 Post(s)
Liked: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
My home theater I am trying to emulate a movie theater, not a flatscreen TV - and a movie theater is max 2000:1 native on/off contrast by law so people don't fall over themselves in the dark.
Since you say you are trying to emulate movie theaters that are max 2k:1 native on/off CR, do you actually calibrate to 2k:1 when the projector can do more than that?

Why do you post about enabling dynamic irises (or dynamic other dynamic dimming systems) when those movie theaters don't have those things? If you were truly trying to emulate a movie theater wouldn't you disable any dynamic system?

Also, as I believe others have pointed out, the DCI CR specs are "at least", not max.

A person could misrepresent the DCI ANSI CR spec too and then claim that ANSI CR that is more than movie theaters doesn't matter either, yet when you have a chance you push that the extra ANSI CR that DLP projectors often have is an advantage. If you are telling the truth that you are trying to emulate a movie theater, why do you push for higher ANSI CR than those SDR theaters deliver and what the DCI spec has?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
And, although its not really that exciting, here is I believe the applicable chapter of NYC building code, for an example of regional safety regulations:
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dob/download...ode/bc27s8.pdf
Anybody here think the Dolby Cinema at the AMC Empire 25 in New York is only 2k:1 on/off CR?

Also, this whole thing about CR just shows how inconsistent you are in order to push DLP projectors. You claim that you are trying to emulate move theaters, where the average theater (not the best theaters) are 2k:1 on/off CR. However, those average theaters are also not more than 2k resolution, yet you keep pushing how important it is for people to get resolution beyond 1080p/2k. Why is that if you are actually trying to emulate those SDR movie theaters?

And who else here would be trying to emulate SDR CR performance while also pushing how important 4K content is, when 4K content is mostly HDR? This is July of 2017. Do we really need somebody on the AVScience forum pushing that aiming for commercial SDR CR performance is what people should be doing?

Ruined loves to use industry standards like that industry marketing group that is the CTA to push that XPR projectors are real 4K, but here he uses SDR CR when there is a standard that addresses CR for HDR for TVs. Of course projectors can't normally go as bright, but the CR performance is also important for HDR with projectors. The UHD Alliance has a standard for HDR and if the manufacturers can't do at least 20k:1 on/off CR then there is no way to qualify, and they need over a million:1 on/off CR if they aren't bright enough. They are also supposed to be able to do more than 93% of P3.

Here are some of those requirements:

- More than 93% of DCI P3 color spectrum
- 1000 nits or higher for white and 0.05 nits or lower for black (20k:1 CR or higher) OR 540 nits or higher for white and 0.0005 nits or lower for black (1,080,000:1 CR or higher)

--Darin
DavidHir likes this.

Last edited by darinp; 07-03-2017 at 02:07 PM.
darinp is offline  
post #17091 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 03:15 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 23,130
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4156 Post(s)
Liked: 2390
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbland View Post
When I got started in FP, my first PJ was a Benq PE8720. It was recommended to me by Art at PR.com (who also had one).
At the time it was about $4.5K and was sharper and darker than almost anything you could find for <$10K. It had powered controls and was, INMO, a gem.
Oh, absolutely, but the key there is <$10K. BenQ's done a great job bringing good performance at a lower price point, IIRC it was the Sharp 10K or 12K at the time (also Marantz) that were the real top dogs, but BenQ managed to bring "most" of that down to a more reasonable price point. But if you go back, I challenge you to find a case where BenQ really pushed the performance envelope. And that's really what we're talking about here, someone needs to push the performance envelope where no one else has, and that's not something BenQ has a history of doing.

Quote:
JVC, Sony and others have raised the bar. I was sad to see Sharp give up on the FP game. The Z30K seemed like a great jumping off place to 4K...
In any case, Benq has not been a mid tier "player" for a while. I have a hunch that they are poised to get back in. At least I hope so.
That pond is a lot deeper than it was in the 8720/W10000 days. When I got my W5000, there wasn't a lot of competition from the LC camp, Sony and Epson both had worse contrast, JVC was still stratospherically expensive. When I got my Planar 8150, things were closer, there was the great battle between PE8150 and RS1, former being much sharper, brighter, much better ANSI contrast, while the latter had the native contrast, though both were actually in the ballpark contrast wise.

But since then the entire LC camp has advanced substantially, while DLP has gone backwards quite a ways. I just don't see how single chip DLP really expects to compete in the $3000+ area. I certainly don't see how BenQ is going to make that happen, unless they are somehow the first to bring tandem DMD machines home, but that seems like more of a Delta/partner thing than a Coretronic/partner one.
stanger89 is offline  
post #17092 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 11:01 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2595
As promised here are some single pixel (and one "multi-pixel") test patterns taken from the UHD65 compared against the reference pattern:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/214550

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/214551

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/214558

I tried my best to match the photo to the reference pattern (R.Masciola HDR UHD Test Pattern Suite). As you can see in the first two shots XPR does not faithfully reproduce single pixel information well at all. The checker board pattern with single pixel black on white "dots" don't even show up and it's just a grey patch on screen. In the first shot you can really see how XPR works. It almost looks like it takes advantage of mirror tilt to aid in the XPR process. You can make out an almost 45 degree angle on some of the pixels. The last shot you can see it does do multi-line horizontal pixel information much better, but then again so do eshift projectors from JVC and Epson. Why are people calling this "native" 4K again?

@darinp @stanger89 @Ruined @RLBURNSIDE @Ericglo @zombie10k
Ericglo likes this.

Last edited by Seegs108; 07-03-2017 at 11:15 PM.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #17093 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 11:21 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2595
And as a reference to how the JVC DLA-RS4500 performs, here is that same part of the test pattern taken with an iphone but you can still easily make out that it's displaying the proper single pixel information, especially the black "dots" in that checkerboard pattern that the UHD65 completely omits:



So I ask again, why are we calling this a "native" 4K projector? Sure...it puts 8.3 million pixels on screen, but most of them aren't accurate to the source. So where does that leave us? I will do my best to take some photos of my RS500 with the same pattern pieces if I get a chance one night this week to see how it compares.
Ericglo likes this.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #17094 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 11:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
RapalloAV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 4,470
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2315 Post(s)
Liked: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
As promised here are some single pixel (and one "multi-pixel") test patterns taken from the UHD65 compared against the reference pattern:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/214550

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/214551

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/214558

I tried my best to match the photo to the reference pattern (R.Masciola HDR UHD Test Pattern Suite). As you can see in the first two shots XPR does not faithfully reproduce single pixel information well at all. The checker board pattern with single pixel black on white "dots" don't even show up and it's just a grey patch on screen. In the first shot you can really see how XPR works. It almost looks like it takes advantage of mirror tilt to aid in the XPR process. You can make out an almost 45 degree angle on some of the pixels. The last shot you can see it does do multi-line horizontal pixel information much better, but then again so do eshift projectors from JVC and Epson. Why are people calling this "native" 4K again?

@darinp @stanger89 @Ruined @RLBURNSIDE @Ericglo @zombie10k
Why are these so bad?

Murray Thompson
X Owner RapalloAV
Absolutly no connection with RapalloNZ
CinemascopE Home Cinema Build & 2014 rebuild, plus new LED ceiling install Christmas 2018
RapalloAV is offline  
post #17095 of 19605 Old 07-03-2017, 11:38 PM
 
Seegs108's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 10,827
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5167 Post(s)
Liked: 2595
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post
Why are these so bad?
It's not that they are "bad", but several people have been describing these XPR models as "native" 4K being able to do the same things a true native 4K display can do. These photos prove that to be completely false.
Ericglo, DavidHir and RapalloAV like this.
Seegs108 is offline  
post #17096 of 19605 Old 07-04-2017, 12:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,939
Mentioned: 659 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2883 Post(s)
Liked: 4358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
It's not that they are "bad", but several people have been describing these XPR models as "native" 4K being able to do the same things a true native 4K display can do. These photos prove that to be completely false.
FWIW, I do like these kind of test patterns. They serve a specific purpose and can tell us a lot. However, they need to be taken with a big pinch of salt because real world content never has a black pixel right next to a white pixel (except maybe in extremely sharp and aliased subtitles). What *really* counts is performance with real world content. I can't stress this enough because as a developer of upscaling algorithms it's important to note that an algorithm can look fantastic on real world content, but still suck with such test patterns.

My suggestion for a good test would be this: Use a high quality and high mega pixel DSLR camera and shoot some images with lots of fine detail and sharp lines (or alternatively try to find some such photos online, e.g. in dpreview digicam image galleries). Then scale the images down to 4K, maybe even add a touch of high quality sharpening, ideally some ringing-free deconvolution. The original images should be much larger than 4K, ideally at least 8K. Then test how faithfully either of these projectors can reveal every last ounce of texture and edge detail. This should be a good test of what reference quality 4K movies might look like some years from now.

Picking the right test image is important. It should have high contrast sharp fine lines, and a lot of texture detail. Ideally a mixture of something human built (house, plane, bridge, whatever) and a lot of nature (trees, bushes), too.

For users who consider using an XPR projector for daily computer work, it might also make sense to compare how each projector can handle a typical Windows or Mac desktop, or a typical browser situation.

So those are the 3 types of test images I'd test with: 1) artificial test patterns 2) very sharp DSLR images 3) computer desktop. IMHO 2) is by far the most important, but of course 1) and 3) are interesting, too. Of course testing with real UHD Blu-Rays is a good idea, too, but since most of them are rather soft right now, I think test 2) will give us more conclusive results. I believe/hope that UHD Blu-Rays will get a lot better/sharper/more detailed in the future.

Just my 2 cents, of course.
madshi is offline  
post #17097 of 19605 Old 07-04-2017, 12:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
steakhouse_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 351 Post(s)
Liked: 201
That's exactly what I meant. It is physically impossible for any shifting tech employing less that 8 "real" megapixels to resolve this pattern.
All it can do is to show sharper edges of objects with less aliasing. When I see pictures of the new faux 4K DLPs I think most of their percived sharpness is due to the higher Overall sharpness of DLP tech and excessive oversharpening going (picture processing like reality creation).
rak306 likes this.
steakhouse_ is online now  
post #17098 of 19605 Old 07-04-2017, 02:42 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 12,505
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4008 Post(s)
Liked: 2333
madshi,
It is important what these pjs look like with video, but some have been suggesting that these XPR pjs will do 4k gaming and computer desktop better as good as native 4k.

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village
Ericglo is offline  
post #17099 of 19605 Old 07-04-2017, 02:55 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,939
Mentioned: 659 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2883 Post(s)
Liked: 4358
Well, if you're interested in how good XPR prjs will do with 4k gaming and computer desktop, then you should test with 4k gaming and computer desktop.

That said, as mentioned, I do like such artificial pixel-by-pixel test patterns myself. If I had an XPR projector, trying such test patterns would be the very first thing I'd do, to get a first idea of how XPR works. We just need to be careful which conclusions to draw from testing with such test patterns. These test patterns may or may not reflect real world usage. Even a computer desktop may show completely different results than such artificial test patterns.

The thing with these test patterns is that they don't classify either as fine detail or strong edges. Instead they more behave like black & white dithering. Which is totally different to any real world usage we will ever have. The test patterns are still very useful to see if a display is able to do 1:1 perfectly lossless pixel reproduction. Obviously XPR can't do that. But with real world content it's still theoretically possible that XPR might achieve virtually the same results as a native 4K display. Or maybe not, I don't know. All I'm saying is that testing with artificial black & white pixel-by-pixel test patterns doesn't proof anything about how XPR might behave with real world material.
Dave Harper, rak306, gain3 and 1 others like this.
madshi is offline  
post #17100 of 19605 Old 07-04-2017, 03:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,859
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2643 Post(s)
Liked: 1273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post
For anyone interested in what the pixel grid on UHD65 looks like here's a comparison picture to the PD8150 (.95" native 1080p DLP DMD).

This is a 3840 x 2160 input to the UHD65 with UI scaling off. As you can see, there is a nice pixel grid (unlike what you get with JVC and Epson eshift projectors) which appears to resemble a native 4K grid. But again, pixels aren't delineated as nicely as some of the more expensive DLP units out there and that's to be expected given the price of this unit:

Hi Seegs,
While you are posting comparison pics of XPR, would you be able to post the same above Windows menu, 3840x2160, eShift on, ui scaling off, using your JVC RS500? If you did so already I didn't see it. But if you didn't, it would give us all a useful reference point on how a JVC/Epson pixelshifting unit compares to a DLP pixelshifting unit with real-world windows content. Thank you.

Last edited by Ruined; 07-04-2017 at 03:27 AM.
Ruined is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

Tags
Benq W7000 Home Projection System , Jvc Dla Rs55 Bundle , Jvc Dla Rs45 Home Theater Projector 1080p Hdmi , Epson V11h502020 Powerlite Home Cinema 3020e 2d And 3d 1080p Wireless Home Theater Projector , Sony Vpl Hw50es 3d Projector , Epson 5010 Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector , Epson Powerlite Home Cinema 3010 2d And 3d Projector V11h421020 , Panasonic Ptae8000u Hd Projector , Mitsubishi Hc7900dw Home Theater 3d Projector , Mitsubishi Hc8000dbl Dlp 3d Home Theater Projector With Spare Lamp 1300 Ansi 12 6 Lbs , Darbeevision Darblet Hdmi Video Processor , Epson 5020ub Powerlite Home Cinema 3d Front Projector

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off