Speaking as someone who has carried out some proper A-B comparisons under controlled conditions, there are indeed very significant differences between JVC DTM and the madVR Envy's DTM. The latter is significantly superior. The difference varies according to the content however there are numerous instances wherein the difference is most certainly 'night and day'. Furthermore, whilst there are some instances wherein the two look similar, there is not one single instance wherein the JVC looks better. In particular, with the madVR Envy DTM at all times the image looks correct. Whilst the JVC DTM is very good, and superior to static HDR10 HDR optimization solutions, there are many instances of chroma shifting, as well as both bright highlight detail loss, shadow detail loss, and contrast loss, which are not present with the madVR Envy DTM. When I have more time I will take some professional photography screenshots to demonstrate this (currently preparing for the Christie Eclipse demo event this weekend).
Also, with respect, we really should not be using photos taken with peoples' phones for scientific evaluation purposes.
The madVR Envy is superior to the Lumagen Pro; and the difference between the Lumagen PRO's DTM and the JVC's is less than as compared with madVR Envy's.
The fact of the matter is that not all DTM solutions are equal. Processing power has a lot to do with it. With the JVC absolutely zero new additional hardware processing power has been added. The feature was added via simple firmware update, hijacking the small amount of processing power previously utlized by the pincushion correction processing. With the Lumagen PRO, whilst the programming has been and continues to be updated, the physical hardware / electronics is locked in and not upgradable. With the madVR Envy this is using up to date specialist premium high powered PC computer components. Hence I liken the respective DTM performance capabilities to that of a pocket calculator (JVC) versus a PC computer and/or GPU of 10 years ago (Lumagen PRO) versus a PC computer and/or GPU of today (madVR Envy). Hence how this translates to actual performance.
Furthermore, it is also worth pointing out that the madVR Envy is doing stuff that neither the JVC or Lumagen PRO does, and this includes its artificial intelligence image processing, patent-pending bright highlight recovery, shadow detail recovery, and contrast recovery. Wherein, correspondingly the madVR Envy's DTM produces significantly superior detail with respect to both the bright highlights and shadow detail, as well as superior contrast and HDR luminance dynamic range accordingly as compared with both the JVC DTM and Lumagen PRO's DTM. And this is not just theoretical, it is real. I have seen this with my own eyes. Like I said, when I can find some free time I will take some photos to illustrate this
The bright highlight recovery in particular is standout impressive. madVR demoed this a few weeks ago at ISE 2020 in Amsterdam and with the room full of AV professionals there were literally gasps from the whole room when this feature was toggled ON and OFF, wherein the projector at the time was SONY's current flagship 5000ES projector.
Further to loss of highlight and shadow detail, the other issue that can often occur with HDR tone-mapping is chroma / hue shifting. This occurs a lot with the JVC DTM, to a much a lesser degree with the Lumagen PRO, but is entirely absent with the madVR Envy.
Furthermore, as far as upscaling is concerned there is no comparison. The madVR Envy destroys both the JVC and Lumagen PRO.
I could go on... But let's just say that speaking as someone who has essentially seen it all and experiences all things high-end AV I am very very rarely this impressed by a video device
This is a common misconception. You will still need DTM unless a video display has 4,000 - 10,000 nits peak luminance capability.
Furtheremore, there are currently numerous issues with the video walls, namely:
1) The issue of having a giant non-acoustically-transparent highly reflective panel on your front wall and all of the problems resulting from that situation, in particular with respect to audio;
3) Visible Screen Texture
4) Achieving and maintaining perfect uniformity across the module panels over time
5) Heat Production
6) The need to purchase spare panels and replace panels over time.
...To name but a few
They are also currently horrendously expensive, as in to have a decent sized screen this will currently cost you well over a million bucks
The fact of the matter is that video walls will never be a 'big nemesis' with respect to either projectors or madVR / madVR Envy. With projectors you don't have any of the above problems. Video walls will secure a niche of the market and coexist alongside both projectors and TVs. And the few individuals who do purchase a video wall will probably want to purchase a madVR Envy as well if they want to obtain the best possible video performance from their display (madVR Envy is not just DTM BTW).