BenQ LK990 - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 764Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 08:08 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1620 Post(s)
Liked: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post
They probably added a yellow notch filter to the L6000 to get 100% DCI P3
If Benq can somehow increase the contrast by some sort of tinkering with the DLP chip, (very good laser dynamic dimming and iris dynamic together), plus maybe some sort of full array local dimming like led TVs... they'll put sony and jvc out of business...
coolgeek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 08:17 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,359
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1243 Post(s)
Liked: 973
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
If Benq can somehow increase the contrast by some sort of tinkering with the DLP chip, (very good laser dynamic dimming and iris dynamic together), plus maybe some sort of full array local dimming like led TVs... they'll put sony and jvc out of business...
Cool ... I have not been watching benq of late, how much of that tech could be off the shelf vs new tech?
Bytehoven is offline  
post #33 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 08:28 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1620 Post(s)
Liked: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bytehoven View Post
Cool ... I have not been watching benq of late, how much of that tech could be off the shelf vs new tech?
Other than the DLP (or any other 4K chips), Benq can probably get them off the shelve and do some engineering tinkering to get DLP back to greatness!

I don't see why they can't simply add a local dimming array in front of the laser light source.. that would get the blacks down to almost OLED like...
coolgeek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 08:34 AM
Member
 
LeQuack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Am I the only one who find dynamic contrast annoying, like yeah it's nice to boost the specs but for watching video I get instantly bothered when it goes on/off, much more noticeable than the dreaded rainbows. I'd rather they do something else, but inherently it's just the nature of projection that the contrast will never be able to be on par with like OLED TVs and similar. When you have a bright pixel next to a dark pixel, it's not problem for an OLED, very minimal light bleed from pixel to pixel, but not possible in projection, the light from the bright pixel will always illuminate the darker one to some degree.
LeQuack is offline  
post #35 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 08:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1620 Post(s)
Liked: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeQuack View Post
Am I the only one who find dynamic contrast annoying, like yeah it's nice to boost the specs but for watching video I get instantly bothered when it goes on/off, much more noticeable than the dreaded rainbows. I'd rather they do something else, but inherently it's just the nature of projection that the contrast will never be able to be on par with like OLED TVs and similar. When you have a bright pixel next to a dark pixel, it's not problem for an OLED, very minimal light bleed from pixel to pixel, but not possible in projection, the light from the bright pixel will always illuminate the darker one to some degree.
I think the bleed problem has to do with the screen type. Otherwise it's not a big issue if the right screen is used.

There's a new Christie projector that uses a lot of local dimming like LED TVs to achieve nearly OLED like quality as reported. But that projector cost in the 6 figures. I am sure if Benq does it, i'll be like $15K price tag...
coolgeek is offline  
post #36 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 08:55 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,359
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1243 Post(s)
Liked: 973
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeQuack View Post
Am I the only one who find dynamic contrast annoying, like yeah it's nice to boost the specs but for watching video I get instantly bothered when it goes on/off, much more noticeable than the dreaded rainbows. I'd rather they do something else, but inherently it's just the nature of projection that the contrast will never be able to be on par with like OLED TVs and similar. When you have a bright pixel next to a dark pixel, it's not problem for an OLED, very minimal light bleed from pixel to pixel, but not possible in projection, the light from the bright pixel will always illuminate the darker one to some degree.
The other sin with DI is how they sometimes manipulate gamma to boost mid and bright tones in the image. This processing can present many artifacts such as crushing highlights, messing with grayscale tracking, even hurting color tracking.

We calibrate our projectirs to squeeze out the last drop of light before clipping. The DI gamma processing goes on top of these calibrations, so its easy to see why the artifacts happen. Sure we could provide calibrated headroom for the DI, but that seems like taking two steps back to take one step forward.
Aztar35 likes this.
Bytehoven is offline  
post #37 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1620 Post(s)
Liked: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bytehoven View Post
The other sin with DI is how they sometimes manipulate gamma to boost mid and bright tones in the image. This processing can present many artifacts such as crushing highlights, messing with grayscale tracking, even hurting color tracking.

We calibrate our projectirs to squeeze out the last drop of light before clipping. The DI gamma processing goes on top of these calibrations, so its easy to see why the artifacts happen. Sure we could provide calibrated headroom for the DI, but that seems like taking two steps back to take one step forward.
This might depend on how sensitive you are... i have never noticed the DI happening..
coolgeek is offline  
post #38 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:04 AM
Member
 
LeQuack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bytehoven View Post
The other sin with DI is how they sometimes manipulate gamma to boost mid and bright tones in the image. This processing can present many artifacts such as crushing highlights, messing with grayscale tracking, even hurting color tracking.

We calibrate our projectirs to squeeze out the last drop of light before clipping. The DI gamma processing goes on top of these calibrations, so its easy to see why the artifacts happen. Sure we could provide calibrated headroom for the DI, but that seems like taking two steps back to take one step forward.

True. And I'm afraid there's going to be even more of that, just because they will always find new ways to sell, once the 4K novelty wears off. I'm sure just like the smart speakers we'll start to see "smart" projectors with integrated AI, that will miserably try to recognize faces and objects and change colors on the fly.
LeQuack is offline  
post #39 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,867
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2284 Post(s)
Liked: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
Other than the DLP (or any other 4K chips), Benq can probably get them off the shelve and do some engineering tinkering to get DLP back to greatness!

I don't see why they can't simply add a local dimming array in front of the laser light source.. that would get the blacks down to almost OLED like...
Coolgeek, if BenQ can get their dimming algo similar to what Optima did with their UHZ65, that alone would be a game changer. I measured over 35,000:1 dynamic contrast on the UHZ and it wasn't even in its most aggressive dimming mode.

I had the BenQ HT9050 and its lens was top notch. I went right up to the screen and could not spot a hint of CA...it was incredible! Still, the dimming won't be enough. Tightening up the light path maybe, if they can get the native contrast to about 3000/4000:1, and get the dimming up, that would help tremendously with compression artifacts.

One of the things with the UHZ, which, by the way, has a native contrast of a little over 1,000:1, was that in dark scenes, bright areas, like faces, could get skewed/blown out. The better lens of the LK990 will help, but a higher native or less aggressive dimming will be even more helpful.
Aztar35 is offline  
post #40 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:33 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
coolgeek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1620 Post(s)
Liked: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aztar35 View Post
Coolgeek, if BenQ can get their dimming algo similar to what Optima did with their UHZ65, that alone would be a game changer. I measured over 35,000:1 dynamic contrast on the UHZ and it wasn't even in its most aggressive dimming mode.

I had the BenQ HT9050 and its lens was top notch. I went right up to the screen and could not spot a hint of CA...it was incredible! Still, the dimming won't be enough. Tightening up the light path maybe, if they can get the native contrast to about 3000/4000:1, and get the dimming up, that would help tremendously with compression artifacts.

One of the things with the UHZ, which, by the way, has a native contrast of a little over 1,000:1, was that in dark scenes, bright areas, like faces, could get skewed/blown out. The better lens of the LK990 will help, but a higher native or less aggressive dimming will be even more helpful.
I don't mean the dynamic laser dimming or dynamic iris dimming.. those yes, they can still perfect the algorithm...

I meant, add a full array local dimming (maybe an LCD screen) in front of the light path... sort of like the full array LED dimming televisions.. that would make black pitch black as you cover up that light path... it won't be 8 million pixels dimming, but maybe 4000 zones or so.. shouldn't be hard to do...
coolgeek is offline  
post #41 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,867
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2284 Post(s)
Liked: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
I don't mean the dynamic laser dimming or dynamic iris dimming.. those yes, they can still perfect the algorithm...

I meant, add a full array local dimming (maybe an LCD screen) in front of the light path... sort of like the full array LED dimming televisions.. that would make black pitch black as you cover up that light path... it won't be 8 million pixels dimming, but maybe 4000 zones or so.. shouldn't be hard to do...

Goodness...that would be some intense thinking out of the box...but also presumably would be intensely expensive. While we're thinking out of the box, it might be easier to come up with a two layer screen ...a photo reactive translucent layer over a black velvet layer for OLED-like blacks. Uh oh...did I just give away a novel idea???
Aztar35 is offline  
post #42 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:46 AM
Member
 
LeQuack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
I don't mean the dynamic laser dimming or dynamic iris dimming.. those yes, they can still perfect the algorithm...

I meant, add a full array local dimming (maybe an LCD screen) in front of the light path... sort of like the full array LED dimming televisions.. that would make black pitch black as you cover up that light path... it won't be 8 million pixels dimming, but maybe 4000 zones or so.. shouldn't be hard to do...

Or something like a 3 chip DLP + a 3 chip LCD combination. The DLP chip is a perfect down to pixel dimming machine, whereas the LCD would take care of the rest.
LeQuack is offline  
post #43 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:48 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Middel east, LEBANON
Posts: 435
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 371 Post(s)
Liked: 235
Christie is using a similar idea i think for their super high end projector, their is a thread about it in the $20 000+ projectors forum, it has 30 000 lumens with 20million:1 native contrast so practically a giant OLED, arguably the perfect projector but would cost like half a million dollars hahhahahahah, maybe in 20 years it ll be less than 30k and we can afford it 😛

JVC DLA X590/RS440
BenQ LK970
tnaik4 is offline  
post #44 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 09:51 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Aztar35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,867
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2284 Post(s)
Liked: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnaik4 View Post
Christie is using a similar idea i think for their super high end projector, their is a thread about it in the $20 000+ projectors forum, it has 30 000 lumens with 20million:1 native contrast so practically a giant OLED, arguably the perfect projector but would cost like half a million dollars hahhahahahah, maybe in 20 years it ll be less than 30k and we can afford it 😛
Or lawful versions of the tech will trickle down to other, less expensive brands as time moves on?
Aztar35 is offline  
post #45 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 10:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,807
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2597 Post(s)
Liked: 1240
Yeah the big difference between DLP and LCD "FALD" is that with DLP you can do per-pixel dimming like OLED. With LCD you cant even come anywhere close to that due to the physical size of the LEDs.

However this tech is a long long ways away from consumer territory due to patents by pro pj companies and limitations imposed by TI on the consumer market to keep the pro market thriving.

Last edited by Ruined; 01-01-2019 at 10:08 AM.
Ruined is offline  
post #46 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 10:13 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frohlich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1972 Post(s)
Liked: 2151
Oh great, another projector to think about. This thing wasn't even on my radar but sure seems like it has potential. Thanks for nothing AVS projector freaks
Aztar35 likes this.
Frohlich is online now  
post #47 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 11:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,618
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3762 Post(s)
Liked: 6420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Harper View Post
It would only be a mistake if ALL you care about is the lowest black levels and nothing else. Just about every other aspect except maybe slightly higher color gamut coverage, including shadow details as tnaik said, is superior on the LK970.

You have to see it properly setup to understand. All those that have, have agreed. All those that haven’t just spew the old stereotype about what a DLP is supposed to look like, as evidenced by those that have and those that haven’t seen one, posting here and elsewhere on the forums.





No it doesn’t matter. What matters is the final end resultant image you watch for the highest percentage of time you’re watching it, and with that in mind the LK970 is arguably the greatest value in projectors at the moment!

Any time anyone wants to fly me over to set one up and compare it to their projector that streets for 3-4 times as much, let me know.

I can’t wait for the LK990!
I looked at the specs on these and I'm surprised. Low 90% for 709 coverage is pretty sad, especially when right in the sales stuff below on their webpage they are showing a scene that supposedly shows their tech vs other HDR projectors and it shows more saturated color. That would definitely NOT be the case if they can't even achieve 709 where most HDR projectors are around 90% or more of P3. Luminance will only get you so far here.

I also don't think that shadow detail is the right word. The reason most people think shadow detail is better on a DLP is because those areas are lifted due to the higher black floor. It takes HIGHER contrast to get better true shadow detail. Most DLPs need to be run at a higher gamma due to the black floor so they don't clip, so they come out of black FASTER. If you setup a higher contrast projector with the same gamma, it would look the same or better more often than not.

I loved the optics on the 9050, it was a great lens. Its big issue at its price point in regards to optics was the lack of motorized control, which is a glaring omission at that price and in the world of scope screens or even trying to dial in focus perfectly at the screen.

I was going to look at one of these for a possible review but I think I will wait for the 9060 as they seem more suited for home theater. After my sit-down with BenQ's engineers after the 9050 review, I have mixed feelings about how many issues will truly be resolved going forward in their designs, but they have the potential to be fantastic.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #48 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 11:37 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,618
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3762 Post(s)
Liked: 6420
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
I don't mean the dynamic laser dimming or dynamic iris dimming.. those yes, they can still perfect the algorithm...

I meant, add a full array local dimming (maybe an LCD screen) in front of the light path... sort of like the full array LED dimming televisions.. that would make black pitch black as you cover up that light path... it won't be 8 million pixels dimming, but maybe 4000 zones or so.. shouldn't be hard to do...
It shouldn't, but it is. I've had MANY talks with manufacturers about this over the last 10 years or so. Some have actually tried it on the R&D side and found too many issues to do mass production. At this point I don't think we'll see it, but stranger things have happened.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #49 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 12:06 PM
Advanced Member
 
12GAGE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 719
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 342 Post(s)
Liked: 387
Hey Kris, the 9060 probably would be better to review however I think you will probably find most of the same issues with some improvements. I am not sure what BenQ changed on the the 990 but the 970 can do about 90% of P3. I thought there marketing data seemed strange on that unit. To your point below; if shadow detail is not the correct term then what would you refer to that phenoma as ? The 970 is a strange bird because it has a better lens than the 9050/9060 and is so bright that you can do some things with the gamma response that probably wouldn't be advisable for a DLP unit that didn't calibrate as bright. 3600 calibrated lumens is something that for hdr is fairly rare in the consumer projector space. Specifically for HDR and sports the 970/990 hit the mark for me. Running a lower gamma (2.6 to 2.8) with the laser algorithm extending brightness for highlights provide an extremely dynamic HDR experience for these units.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
I looked at the specs on these and I'm surprised. Low 90% for 709 coverage is pretty sad, especially when right in the sales stuff below on their webpage they are showing a scene that supposedly shows their tech vs other HDR projectors and it shows more saturated color. That would definitely NOT be the case if they can't even achieve 709 where most HDR projectors are around 90% or more of P3. Luminance will only get you so far here.

I also don't think that shadow detail is the right word. The reason most people think shadow detail is better on a DLP is because those areas are lifted due to the higher black floor. It takes HIGHER contrast to get better true shadow detail. Most DLPs need to be run at a higher gamma due to the black floor so they don't clip, so they come out of black FASTER. If you setup a higher contrast projector with the same gamma, it would look the same or better more often than not.

I loved the optics on the 9050, it was a great lens. Its big issue at its price point in regards to optics was the lack of motorized control, which is a glaring omission at that price and in the world of scope screens or even trying to dial in focus perfectly at the screen.

I was going to look at one of these for a possible review but I think I will wait for the 9060 as they seem more suited for home theater. After my sit-down with BenQ's engineers after the 9050 review, I have mixed feelings about how many issues will truly be resolved going forward in their designs, but they have the potential to be fantastic.
12GAGE is offline  
post #50 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 12:51 PM
 
Dave Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Paradise on Earth
Posts: 6,554
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3159 Post(s)
Liked: 1723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bytehoven View Post
Dave... with such nice lumen output, if using the lk990 or future l6000, would a filter be used to dial in performance for a smaller 115" size screen?



Id love to see either if these units in action.

I’m hoping to find that out soon. I’ve been having some goings back and forth with @Gary Lightfoot about filters and what he’s tried and what’s best for this type of situation and it seems we’ve narrowed it down to most likely an FL-D filter and/or possibly an ND filter, or maybe a combo of both.

I’m debating ordering them now to try on the LK970 or wait until the LK990/L6000 is released and see what they have to offer first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
I looked at the specs on these and I'm surprised. Low 90% for 709 coverage is pretty sad, especially when right in the sales stuff below on their webpage they are showing a scene that supposedly shows their tech vs other HDR projectors and it shows more saturated color. That would definitely NOT be the case if they can't even achieve 709 where most HDR projectors are around 90% or more of P3. Luminance will only get you so far here.



I also don't think that shadow detail is the right word. The reason most people think shadow detail is better on a DLP is because those areas are lifted due to the higher black floor. It takes HIGHER contrast to get better true shadow detail. Most DLPs need to be run at a higher gamma due to the black floor so they don't clip, so they come out of black FASTER. If you setup a higher contrast projector with the same gamma, it would look the same or better more often than not.



I loved the optics on the 9050, it was a great lens. Its big issue at its price point in regards to optics was the lack of motorized control, which is a glaring omission at that price and in the world of scope screens or even trying to dial in focus perfectly at the screen.



I was going to look at one of these for a possible review but I think I will wait for the 9060 as they seem more suited for home theater. After my sit-down with BenQ's engineers after the 9050 review, I have mixed feelings about how many issues will truly be resolved going forward in their designs, but they have the potential to be fantastic.

I believe the color gamut was measured with the high lumens for business purposes since this is marketed as a business/commercial machine for places like museums, churches, etc. if you calibrate that down and mess with the CMS, greyscale, user controls, Gamma, etc. as I do you’ll find you get much more out of it, at least on the LK970 anyway so we are hoping the LK990 is the same with the improvements we’ve been hoping for over the LK970.

I get what you’re saying about shadow detail, but as 12GAGE says below, what else do we call it? I’m telling you this is a unit you have to see, setup the way I do, to understand. I feel like I just stumbled on this and it’s something that defies normal projector logic. The combination of my tweaks and the design seem to meld together almost perfectly. By tricking the source with something like an HDFury to send full a HDR signal, then changing gamma to 2.8, increasing contrast and colors and then going into CMS and Gains/Cuts and doing some magic, the end result on 95%+ of HDR scenes is nothing short of astonishing!

In my personal experience with the HT9050 and LK970, you’ll be doing yourself (and maybe your readers) a disservice by choosing only the HT9060 over an LK970/990/L6000. At worst I would do a 960 along with an LK990/L6000.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 12GAGE View Post
Hey Kris, the 9060 probably would be better to review however I think you will probably find most of the same issues with some improvements. I am not sure what BenQ changed on the the 990 but the 970 can do about 90% of P3. I thought there marketing data seemed strange on that unit. To your point below; if shadow detail is not the correct term then what would you refer to that phenoma as ? The 970 is a strange bird because it has a better lens than the 9050/9060 and is so bright that you can do some things with the gamma response that probably wouldn't be advisable for a DLP unit that didn't calibrate as bright. 3600 calibrated lumens is something that for hdr is fairly rare in the consumer projector space. Specifically for HDR and sports the 970/990 hit the mark for me. Running a lower gamma (2.6 to 2.8) with the laser algorithm extending brightness for highlights provide an extremely dynamic HDR experience for these units.

Yes their marketing on these is very strange indeed. It’s clearly pushed towards the “I need max brightness for a bright room” crowd, but with some small keywords for the latest video signal tech like HDR, 4K, color gamut, etc. thrown in to hit some mental points the buyer may have from their internet research since they were tasked to buy their company some new projectors.

Kris, just ignore their marketing since it’s known that this model isn’t marketed for what we want to use it for. We all know marketing is way off of the truth for HT models with things like their contrast and brightness in lumens claims, so why start all of the sudden believing them now when there’s so many first hand reports to the contrary?

I have said it on so many occasions but I’ll say it again. This is a unit you MUST see properly setup for our use to understand. If you haven’t then whatever preconceived notions you have will take over, and they’ll be way off.
Dave Harper is offline  
post #51 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 12:57 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,618
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3762 Post(s)
Liked: 6420
The 9050 measured almost 100% of P3. The problem with it though was that it was actually IN P3, not 2020. So it has the gamut coverage, it was just using the wrong color profile so it didn't work properly with a 2020 input (colors all shift). I explained this to them in the meeting and was hoping they would offer a firmware fix for this, but I haven't seen anything about it.

As for shadow detail, it is technically still shadow detail, it is just that the information is obvious for different reasons than most post. It is typically just brighter at low APL levels (due to lack of contrast). Eventually as you go lower and lower in APL, the black floor becomes the limit and you just get a straight line. If you were to measure it for BT1886 this becomes REALLY obvious as the DLP will come out of black REALLY fast and you end up with an overall gamma that is much higher (2.1-2.2) whereas a display with high contrast will be closer to the intended 2.4 gamma (2.3-2.4). When you take two displays like this and do a split screen comparison in a properly calibrated environment, the difference is staggering. But I realize that most people don't watch content in the real world like that. But once you've seen these types of comparisons and realize how much you are compromising, it is hard to go back. I'm sure some here feel the same way about super brightness though, and that is understandable, especially with different viewing environments.

For HDR DLP needs to be as bright as possible to make up for the range it lacks on the lower end. The brighter you can drive it, the more biased your eye becomes to help simulate a better black floor. With the right tone mapping it will probably look great for most content out there. But in a perfect world you'd have both, and other than cost no object R&D designs we are a long way from that regardless of what projector you're using.
DavidHir likes this.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #52 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 01:04 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,618
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3762 Post(s)
Liked: 6420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Harper View Post
I have said it on so many occasions but I’ll say it again. This is a unit you MUST see properly setup for our use to understand. If you haven’t then whatever preconceived notions you have will take over, and they’ll be way off.
Preconceived notions really have zero interest to me. I look at the marketing to make sure that when I'm reviewing I point out the areas that DO NOT meet the marketing specs so that consumers can make a more informed decision. The 9050's marketing and specifications were grossly exaggerated and in some cases outright lies. I obviously go into reviews with some preconceived notions of the performance I can expect from different technologies since I've had so much experience with the different display types, but I do the same testing regardless of the display so that all my conclusions are based on objective testing. I would love nothing more than to get a DLP projector in that completely changes the game! It is exactly what this industry needs!

But I also see contradiction in your statements (and I don't mean this at all to be taken offensively). I shouldn't have to take a display like this and apply random settings to get it to look some way that is subjectively good. There are very clear standards for video setup that remove any "magical" settings. If you calibrate a projector to those standards, it should look terrific if the projector does its job properly.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
post #53 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 01:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
12GAGE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 719
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 342 Post(s)
Liked: 387
Thanks Kris. I think your quote hit the nail on the head about HDR on this unit. It is pretty bright 3600-4200 calibrated lumens, can put out good color and has an excellent lens to resolve max detail. With the right tone mapping it is awesome. I use MadVR and can't say enough good things about the dynamic mapping. With all that being said, this unit can be calibrated and put out solid images without any magic settings. It honestly is a typical DLP unit (same drawbacks with placement and black floor) but one of the 1st laser DLP units with a great lens and excellent brightness. 4K HDR is a bit of a different animal and when you see a projector that can deliver the good in that space it catches your eye. It would be nice to have a display without compromises but in the realistic consumer space it may be awhile before we get there.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
The 9050 measured almost 100% of P3. The problem with it though was that it was actually IN P3, not 2020. So it has the gamut coverage, it was just using the wrong color profile so it didn't work properly with a 2020 input (colors all shift). I explained this to them in the meeting and was hoping they would offer a firmware fix for this, but I haven't seen anything about it.

As for shadow detail, it is technically still shadow detail, it is just that the information is obvious for different reasons than most post. It is typically just brighter at low APL levels (due to lack of contrast). Eventually as you go lower and lower in APL, the black floor becomes the limit and you just get a straight line. If you were to measure it for BT1886 this becomes REALLY obvious as the DLP will come out of black REALLY fast and you end up with an overall gamma that is much higher (2.1-2.2) whereas a display with high contrast will be closer to the intended 2.4 gamma (2.3-2.4). When you take two displays like this and do a split screen comparison in a properly calibrated environment, the difference is staggering. But I realize that most people don't watch content in the real world like that. But once you've seen these types of comparisons and realize how much you are compromising, it is hard to go back. I'm sure some here feel the same way about super brightness though, and that is understandable, especially with different viewing environments.

For HDR DLP needs to be as bright as possible to make up for the range it lacks on the lower end. The brighter you can drive it, the more biased your eye becomes to help simulate a better black floor. With the right tone mapping it will probably look great for most content out there. But in a perfect world you'd have both, and other than cost no object R&D designs we are a long way from that regardless of what projector you're using.
Dave Harper and Kris Deering like this.
12GAGE is offline  
post #54 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 02:20 PM
 
Dave Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Paradise on Earth
Posts: 6,554
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3159 Post(s)
Liked: 1723
BenQ LK990

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
Preconceived notions really have zero interest to me. ............

........I obviously go into reviews with some preconceived notions of the performance I can expect from different technologies since I've had so much experience with the different display types.............
Speaking of contradictions.........



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Deering View Post
........But I also see contradiction in your statements (and I don't mean this at all to be taken offensively). I shouldn't have to take a display like this and apply random settings to get it to look some way that is subjectively good. There are very clear standards for video setup that remove any "magical" settings. If you calibrate a projector to those standards, it should look terrific if the projector does its job properly.

There is no contradiction or “magic” settings. The reason being is because this model doesn’t do HDR and is not spec’d for it at all. I have to do what I do with it so it CAN display HDR “BT2020” properly. The magic I speak of is in regards to the end result.

I understand full well the standards and what they are and should be. But I’ve also said a million times I’m not just another numbers plugger “because that’s what the specs say which were created by some nerdy scientist in a lab”. I wholeheartedly believe it’s as much an art form as it is science when it comes to the final image that’s seen on the screen. You can start with a baseline to get the numbers where they should be, but then I believe any calibrator worth his salt will then use his/her knowledge and experience as an artistic final stage to make the image so incredibly pleasing that it makes the viewer walk away feeling happy, excited and smiling after the experience.

I’ve also said, in the end I don’t care if it’s real or perceived, as long as my brain saw it that way and I come away happy and amazed at what I just experienced. I equate it to a magic show. I KNOW it isn’t real and don’t always understand how what I saw happened, but I can and do enjoy the wonder nonetheless.

This is how I feel and who I am and if that’s different than the mass herd, so be it.
Dave Harper is offline  
post #55 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 02:54 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 229
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 160
I really appreciate the discussion here as someone making their first projector purchase ever. I don't know how the average consumer could navigate any of this except via ignorance and contentedness with "it just works".

I find both arguments very compelling. Really I would need to finish blacking my room out and test both projectors side by side after a few days of calibration and experimenting. The logistics don't work out well even if someone was willing to do a projector shootout in person. Projectors are difficult, but I knew that coming into this project.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolgeek View Post
I can tell you this also, I have auditioned both the N5 and the NX9... the NX9 were shown on a 200 inch 1.0 AT screen and the N5 were shown on a 120 inch 1.6 gain screen. Anyone who looked at those two projectors would instantly think the NX9 were an inferior projector.. because it just didn't have enough light to light up the 200 inch screen. the N5 had just enough for the 120 inch with 1.6 gain. Any bigger and you'll lose all the picture quality...

So, if you intend to have a bigger screen like a 10 feet wide or above, and unless you're getting like a 1.8 gain screen, the N7 just wouldn't cut it... even with it's superior black floor, the image would still be washed out...

You need first and foremost the LUMENS to get you to at least 70 foot lamberts or beyond (to properly do HDR), and maybe even higher to do 3D... i suggest even in a bat cave, you need 40 lumens and above for SDR to start seeing the true pop of an image... once you see what true pop looks like you'll never go back... you can forgive a lot of things like 'black foor', 'shimering from higher gain screens', etc, etc... because the image improvments is really night and day...
This is good information. Thank you. Yeah the NX9 on a 200" screen gets barely 17 fL; definitely not sufficient. I really like the idea of getting over 100 fL peak brightness on my 135" 16:9 screen using the LK990 compared to 33 fL on the NX7. My plan is to adjust the screen down to 100" 2.39:1 for movies, which would give me 54 fL peak. Still not up to your standard of 70 fL unless I purchased a higher gain screen.

I'll keep thinking about it. The bottom line is that there are many things I would have to sacrifice (both features and specs) to go with the BenQ over the new JVCs. I'm absolutely on the fence because I really do appreciate brightness and your points are certainly valid. Laser is compelling.

Last edited by wombats; 01-01-2019 at 02:58 PM.
wombats is offline  
post #56 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 04:05 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,618
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3762 Post(s)
Liked: 6420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Harper View Post
Speaking of contradictions.........






There is no contradiction or “magic” settings. The reason being is because this model doesn’t do HDR and is not spec’d for it at all. I have to do what I do with it so it CAN display HDR “BT2020” properly. The magic I speak of is in regards to the end result.

I understand full well the standards and what they are and should be. But I’ve also said a million times I’m not just another numbers plugger “because that’s what the specs say which were created by some nerdy scientist in a lab”. I wholeheartedly believe it’s as much an art form as it is science when it comes to the final image that’s seen on the screen. You can start with a baseline to get the numbers where they should be, but then I believe any calibrator worth his salt will then use his/her knowledge and experience as an artistic final stage to make the image so incredibly pleasing that it makes the viewer walk away feeling happy, excited and smiling after the experience.

I’ve also said, in the end I don’t care if it’s real or perceived, as long as my brain saw it that way and I come away happy and amazed at what I just experienced. I equate it to a magic show. I KNOW it isn’t real and don’t always understand how what I saw happened, but I can and do enjoy the wonder nonetheless.

This is how I feel and who I am and if that’s different than the mass herd, so be it.
But that leads me right back to the last post, this projector IS SPEC'ED FOR HDR AND IT IS ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS LISTED ON THE WEBPAGE FOR THE PRODUCT! Here is a cut and paste of the FIRST THINGS IT SAYS ON THE PRODUCT PAGE:

"4K HDR Installation Laser Projector with 6000 Lumens | LK990
Ultra-Accurate 4K HDR BlueCore Laser Projection for Enjoying Superb Entertainment Content "

So how is that not spec'ed for HDR or "doesn't do" HDR?? What does "Ultra-Accurate" mean if it doesn't actually use anything resembling ST2084 or something along the lines of BT2390 or some kind of home brewed tone map? How is it ultra accurate if it can't even do 709 color let alone P3 within 2020? If you have to trick it with a HD Fury to even do HDR, the consumer is being LIED to, plain and simple.

It seems there is a little bit of a difference in how we perceive the job of calibration. My job isn't to season a person's display to my tastes, it is to calibrate the image so that it is accurate and faithful to the intended image. From there I can educate a user on options for their own seasoning, or try to inform them of the pros and cons of using different adjustments to get the display to their liking, but it defeats the point of CALIBRATION to take artistic license unless the client specifically says they are looking for something else. I have been calibrating displays for YEARS and I've never heard anyone complain about the images that result. Never comments like dark, dull, washed out, or anything else. If they just want something bright and punchy, there are preset picture modes that can provide that all day long and they can save their money on a calibration. Calibrating images is not only about getting the image the way it is intended, but also educating the consumer on why we do it in the first place.

I completely understand your comments on having to fool around with the settings to get them to work, but you can still apply the same standards in measurements to see if the tweaks you are doing are actually going in the right or wrong direction. That way you can make a more informed decision on whether you're going in the right or wrong direction and what the compromises are in doing so. If you are just shooting in the dark and looking at content to do it, your settings mainly apply only to the content you are watching. Sure that may look good with a good number of items, but it can look equally awful with others. This is why the idea of a single tone map that works across all titles is so ludicrous. But if you are adjusting to a standard that material is actually mastered to (which ALL consumer video is), you have a better chance of making sure that the vast majority of the content looks the way it was intended or close to it. This puts the onus on the material to be right, not the display, and thankfully that is the case more often than not.

Please don't take any of this as an attack. I would LOVE to see your "Harpervision" setup with a bunch of projectors as I've mentioned before. Just because our methodology doesn't necessarily jive doesn't mean that I hold any ill will or don't think you can't enjoy your settings. It is just a difference in approach.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education

Last edited by Kris Deering; 01-01-2019 at 04:08 PM.
Kris Deering is offline  
post #57 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 04:45 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Middel east, LEBANON
Posts: 435
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 371 Post(s)
Liked: 235
Kris , dave was talking about the LK970 which is not native HDR and needs the HDfury.
Dave Harper and Kris Deering like this.

JVC DLA X590/RS440
BenQ LK970
tnaik4 is offline  
post #58 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 05:38 PM
Senior Member
 
chhanthony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 294
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Liked: 108
As a 5 days user of LK990 and a professional calibrator, my comments on this LK990 is:-

1 the user have to lower the contrast from 50 to 30 to get the stable color temp and turns out the lumens have been bring down a lot....but it still have 110 nits in SDR and 200 nit in HDR in a 100" screen, the simple word is the maximum brightness is unusable ;
2. there is no gamma adjustment in HDR mode, the user only can adjust the HDR brightness "HDR -1 -2 0 +1 +2";
3 the color in cinema mode is quite under saturation
4. the picture is dim and flat in HDR mode, I have to adjust the HDR Brightness to "+2" to get an acceptable image brightness, when I turned off the HDR in UB900 the color depth and dynamic is much better in HDR mode.
5. SmartEco can project a true black screen and it works like DC1 on UHZ65
6. the color accuracy is disappointed me especially in HDR mode, the color's brightness is too high and no way to bring it down and the saturation is too under, the color hue also act weird, in playing the Greatest Showman Hugh Jackman's suite should be red but LK990 made it a little bit pink look, the 100% cyan in REC709 is go to green side when 75% cyan is go to blue side. Just like all DLP HDR projector with 25% 50% are under saturation but the 75% is way over.....
Compare to my 3 years old HT1075 entry level 1080P, HT1075 I can get <2 dE in grey scale and most color <1 dE in color checker.........
7. THE MOST WEIRD THING is there has a light border surrounding the image like 0.47 DMD and there have some serious banding in the lower light and high light screen, I took some picture and sent to BenQ and I returned the LK990 to BenQ last Friday as their requested.

I am trying to ask them to return my money back. As I think LK990 is a pre-mature product.

Anthony Chan
AV Blog: http://www.avnewbie.com
System: 5.3.4
Panasonic DMP-UB900EBK, Egreat A5, Anthem AVM60, Krell KAV2250 X 2, Theater Amplifier Standard, M&K S-150 X 5, SS150 X 4, Martin Logan Descent-i and Thiel SS 2, SS2.2 and SI 1 Integrator, Benq HT1075, JK 126" Fixed Screen N4-FL/W1

Last edited by chhanthony; 01-01-2019 at 05:55 PM.
chhanthony is offline  
post #59 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 05:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Frohlich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1972 Post(s)
Liked: 2151
Quote:
Originally Posted by chhanthony View Post
As a 5 days user of LK990 and a professional calibrator, my comments on this LK990 is:-

1 the user have to lower the contrast from 50 to 30 to get the stable color temp and turns out the lumens have been bring down a lot....but it still have 110 nits in SDR and 200 nit in HDR in a 100" screen, the simple word is the maximum brightness is unusable ;
2. there is no gamma adjustment in HDR mode, the user only can adjust the HDR brightness "HDR -1 -2 0 +1 +2";
3 the color in cinema mode is quite under saturation
4. the picture is dim and flat in HDR mode, I have to adjust the HDR Brightness to "+2" to get an acceptable image brightness, when I turned off the HDR in UB900 the color depth and dynamic is much better in HDR mode.
5. SmartEco can project a true black screen and it works like DC1 on UHZ65
6. the color accuracy is disappointed me especially in HDR mode, the color's brightness is too high and no way to bring it down and the saturation is too under, the color hue also act weird, in playing the Greatest Showman Hugh Jackman's suite should be red but LK990 made it a little bit pink look, the 100% cyan in REC709 is go to green side when 75% cyan is go to blue side. Just like all DLP HDR projector with 25% 50% are under saturation but the 75% is way over.....
Compare to my 3 years old HT1075 entry level 1080P, HT1075 I can get <2 dE in grey scale and most color <1 dE in color checker.........
7. THE MOST WEIRD THING is there has a light border surrounding the image like 0.47 DMD and there have some serious banding in the lower light and high light screen, I took some picture and sent to BenQ and I returned the LK990 to BenQ last Friday as their requested.

I am trying to ask them for return. As I think LK990 is a pre-mature product.
Thanks for the honest review...even if it is disappointing to hear the details.
Frohlich is online now  
post #60 of 960 Old 01-01-2019, 05:54 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Kris Deering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Pacific Northwet
Posts: 10,618
Mentioned: 186 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3762 Post(s)
Liked: 6420
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnaik4 View Post
Kris , dave was talking about the LK970 which is not native HDR and needs the HDfury.
Doh! Sorry, I thought all the talk was about the LK990 that is in the thread title. Sorry Dave!
Dave Harper likes this.

My Home Theater UPDATED DEC 2017
Technical Editor/Writer Sound and Vision Magazine
Deep Dive AV - Calibration, Consulting and Education
Kris Deering is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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