AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/)
-   -   JVC RS540 vs Epson 5050UB (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/3101778-jvc-rs540-vs-epson-5050ub.html)

filmgeek47 11-12-2019 12:23 AM

JVC RS540 vs Epson 5050UB
 
Hey guys,

Found a good deal which puts the JVC only $300 higher than the Epson. Not finding a lot of reviews of the JVC and don’t have anywhere to demo it, whereas I’ve seen the Epson and walked away impressed. I’m currently using a Sony Hw40ES on a 120” screen in a fully light controlled space.

Thoughts?

My greatest worries are:

A- the Epson won’t offer a noticeable contrast/black level/ color improvement over what I have now on the Blu-ray’s that make up the bulk of my collection.

B- the JVC is a few years old and might suffer from early teething issues with 4K HDR like poor dynamic range compensation. I’ve also heard some issues of oddly long HDMI handshake which could be annoying?

Is one obviously better than the other? I know I’m picking between an older heavyweight and a state of the art middle weight, and honestly not sure which way to go. I also like that the Epson would be brand new, whereas the JVC is B stock which would only include a 1 yr warranty, and no returns save for defects.

Krbass 11-12-2019 01:08 AM

I got to do a side by side at a close friends place. The RS540 won hands down, that's not to say the Epson wasn't fantastic. The RS540s contrast was the real wow factor and I thought the jvc did a better job with pixel shifting.

If I had not gotten the deal I got on my Rs540(X790) I would have been getting the 5050.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

filmgeek47 11-12-2019 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krbass (Post 58808006)
I got to do a side by side at a close friends place. The RS540 won hands down, that's not to say the Epson wasn't fantastic. The RS540s contrast was the real wow factor and I thought the jvc did a better job with pixel shifting.

If I had not gotten the deal I got on my Rs540(X790) I would have been getting the 5050.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Thanks! Can you comment on the rs540’s tone mapping? I’m using a Vero 4K to stream from my local server, so I can’t necsssarily rely on buying a fancy Bluray player to compensate if the projector’s HDR processing isn’t up to snuff.

filmgeek47 11-12-2019 07:48 AM

Also, any thoughts on using this for gaming? I’m not a hardcore FPS freak or anything, but I need to be able to play some halo on occasion...

samovies10 11-12-2019 01:37 PM

I would look into trying to use madVR for PC if you're streaming from a server. It's a great tone mapper and you'll certainly benefit from it if you're using an 'older' projector. I'm not sure if it's possible to add it to the Vero or to the server, but even if it's not it might be worth getting a cheaper desktop to add madVR and let it tone map according to the projector's capabilities.

ScottAvery 11-13-2019 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filmgeek47 (Post 58808902)
Thanks! Can you comment on the rs540’s tone mapping? I’m using a Vero 4K to stream from my local server, so I can’t necsssarily rely on buying a fancy Bluray player to compensate if the projector’s HDR processing isn’t up to snuff.

There is no built-in dynamic tone mapping feature in the rs540, that was added in the next generation. What you can do is load multiple gamma curves and choose the one appropriate for your content. pairing with an external tone mapper like the Panasonic UHD player or an HTPC could fulfill your need. I am satisfied with being able to tune the gamma curve.

filmgeek47 11-13-2019 09:44 AM

Thanks. That’s exactly what I was curious about. So can you save preset curves and swap between them in the menu? Just don’t want to spend ten minutes tweaking all my picture settings every time I throw on an HDR movie.

My streamer box (vero 4k +) is supposedly adding tone mapping in the future, and in the mean time most of my library is Blu-ray.

ScottAvery 11-13-2019 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filmgeek47 (Post 58815186)
Thanks. That’s exactly what I was curious about. So can you save preset curves and swap between them in the menu? Just don’t want to spend ten minutes tweaking all my picture settings every time I throw on an HDR movie.

My streamer box (vero 4k +) is supposedly adding tone mapping in the future, and in the mean time most of my library is Blu-ray.

Since there are 3 hard buttons on the remote for presets, you don't even need to open a menu to change your gamma selection. The out of the box performance for SDR bluray on the RS540 is spectacular. HDR takes significant tuning, but that is pretty much the case for every platform. The very, very low black levels of the DILA-based JVC will blow you away. Fades to black will make your heart stop because you'll think something broke!

The Epson has many newer features, but the underlying LCD technology is still inferior.

willieconway 11-13-2019 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filmgeek47 (Post 58815186)
Thanks. That’s exactly what I was curious about. So can you save preset curves and swap between them in the menu? Just don’t want to spend ten minutes tweaking all my picture settings every time I throw on an HDR movie.

My streamer box (vero 4k +) is supposedly adding tone mapping in the future, and in the mean time most of my library is Blu-ray.

I have saved two Arve curves, 1200 nits and 4000 nits, and select one depending on what mastering info is available. If nothing is available I usually just go with the 1200 nits curve. I don't touch anything else and have never thought that HDR content looked anything less than great. Very much set it and forget it for me.

coxy2416 11-13-2019 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottAvery (Post 58815278)
Quote:

Originally Posted by filmgeek47 (Post 58815186)
Thanks. That’️s exactly what I was curious about. So can you save preset curves and swap between them in the menu? Just don’️t want to spend ten minutes tweaking all my picture settings every time I throw on an HDR movie.

My streamer box (vero 4k +) is supposedly adding tone mapping in the future, and in the mean time most of my library is Blu-ray.

Since there are 3 hard buttons on the remote for presets, you don't even need to open a menu to change your gamma selection. The out of the box performance for SDR bluray on the RS540 is spectacular. HDR takes significant tuning, but that is pretty much the case for every platform. The very, very low black levels of the DILA-based JVC will blow you away. Fades to black will make your heart stop because you'll think something broke!

The Epson has many newer features, but the underlying LCD technology is still inferior.

My vote is on the JVC as it should be a huge step up from the Epson.

SDR is fantastic out of the box as was stated earlier and HDR can be really good when you take the time to load Arve curves. I believe Javs has a step by step instruction on this but many here on the forum can give you a hand with that.

I took it one step further and just recently went the MadVR route. Hands down the best my HDR has looked with the dynamic tone mapping. Once you see it you won’t want to go back!

filmgeek47 11-13-2019 01:09 PM

Thanks so much guys! I just gotta raise a little extra cash, but I’m definitely gonna try and pickup the JVC. Crossing my fingers the deal’s still there in a few days 🙂

dgkula 11-13-2019 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willieconway (Post 58815382)
I have saved two Arve curves, 1200 nits and 4000 nits, and select one depending on what mastering info is available. If nothing is available I usually just go with the 1200 nits curve. I don't touch anything else and have never thought that HDR content looked anything less than great. Very much set it and forget it for me.

I had been running a JVC RS620 with an HDFury Integral 2 with the JVC macro and the RS232 cable. I uploaded 3 custom curves and the integral would look at the HDR metadata and send commands to the JVC via RS232 to switch automatically to the right custom curve. It was a great setup for static tone mapping.

I just upgraded to the Lumagen so now have dynamic tone mapping. Wow. But another $4k. I would gladly sell you the Integral and help you set it up if you go the RS540 route and want to automate the curve switching.

willieconway 11-13-2019 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgkula (Post 58817564)
I had been running a JVC RS620 with an HDFury Integral 2 with the JVC macro and the RS232 cable. I uploaded 3 custom curves and the integral would look at the HDR metadata and send commands to the JVC via RS232 to switch automatically to the right custom curve. It was a great setup for static tone mapping.

I just upgraded to the Lumagen so now have dynamic tone mapping. Wow. But another $4k. I would gladly sell you the Integral and help you set it up if you go the RS540 route and want to automate the curve switching.

Appreciate it but I don't care enough about HDR to add devices or spend additional money.

filmgeek47 11-15-2019 10:20 PM

Guys, thanks for all your help! Went ahead and ordered the Rs540U. Shoutout to Mike Garrett at AvScience for the great deal and fantastic service!

Krbass 11-18-2019 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58836548)
How did they compare in terms of brightness? I was interested in the JVC X790 but I heard it's lumens are much lower than a Epson 5050 in natural mode.

I think the Epsons brightest modes are brighter but these were in an almost fully blacked out room and both were in low lamp mode. The Epson by no means shoots a bad image, it's very nice. For a light controlled room the JVC crushed the Epson in black levels which to my eyes made the picture look much more punchy and sharper.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

SirMaster 11-18-2019 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58836548)
How did they compare in terms of brightness? I was interested in the JVC X790 but I heard it's lumens are much lower than a Epson 5050 in natural mode.

It's dimmer, but not by much

Epson 5050UB in natural or bright cinema will do close to around 2000 lumens at wide zoom. The JVC X790R will be around 1700 even in the most accurate and calibrated modes. If you calibrate both I bet they are within 100-200 lumens max difference.

Mike Garrett 11-18-2019 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMaster (Post 58837432)
It's dimmer, but not by much

Epson 5050UB in natural or bright cinema will do close to around 2000 lumens at wide zoom. The JVC X790R will be around 1700 even in the most accurate and calibrated modes. If you calibrate both I bet they are within 100-200 lumens max difference.

Yes, if you calibrate both to a de of less than 3, the two are nearly the same. Uncalibrated the Epson is brighter, but calibrated with DCI P3 filter in place, the RS540/X790 is brighter for HDR.

SirMaster 11-18-2019 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Garrett (Post 58837850)
Yes, if you calibrate both to a de of less than 3, the two are nearly the same. Uncalibrated the Epson is brighter, but calibrated with DCI P3 filter in place, the RS540/X790 is brighter for HDR.

Well if you use the P3 filter on the Epson yeah, that cuts the brightness down to about half heh. On the JVC it's not nearly that much of a cut. The JVC would definitely be brighter with the filter on.

Luminated67 11-19-2019 05:40 AM

The very natural of how a projector produces blacks determines that for the very best of the breed out perform the rest requires the room to be devoid of any light including reflective. So with that in mind if you room isn’t ideal this contrast advantage will be compromised, how much depends of how bad the room is, then surely other factors of a projectors performance will come to the forefront as being more important.

I think ultimately the goal is to have the perfect room conditions regardless of projector but when for whatever reason this isn’t possible should anyone really pick the likes of a JVC (the contrast king) over the likes of a Sony or even an Epson?

Mike Garrett 11-19-2019 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luminated67 (Post 58842380)
The very natural of how a projector produces blacks determines that for the very best of the breed out perform the rest requires the room to be devoid of any light including reflective. So with that in mind if you room isn’t ideal this contrast advantage will be compromised, how much depends of how bad the room is, then surely other factors of a projectors performance will come to the forefront as being more important.

I think ultimately the goal is to have the perfect room conditions regardless of projector but when for whatever reason this isn’t possible should anyone really pick the likes of a JVC (the contrast king) over the likes of a Sony or even an Epson?

A higher contrast projector will always have higher contrast in any room, if all other factors are equal. But I agree that if the room is crap, it is less important.

SirMaster 11-19-2019 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luminated67 (Post 58842380)
The very natural of how a projector produces blacks determines that for the very best of the breed out perform the rest requires the room to be devoid of any light including reflective. So with that in mind if you room isn’t ideal this contrast advantage will be compromised, how much depends of how bad the room is, then surely other factors of a projectors performance will come to the forefront as being more important.

I think ultimately the goal is to have the perfect room conditions regardless of projector but when for whatever reason this isn’t possible should anyone really pick the likes of a JVC (the contrast king) over the likes of a Sony or even an Epson?

In my experience, the big contrast advantage on something like a Sony and even more so a JVC is in the under 5% or especially under 2% APL scenes.

There is such little light in these scenes that there really isn't much to even reflect off walls and ceiling in the first place.

Blacking out your reflections is important, don't get me wrong, but in my experience, it's not any more important for a high contrast projector than it is for a low contrast projector. So I wouldn't tell someone that a high contrast projector will go to waste in a room with white walls and ceiling.

Not to be confused though with ambient light in the room which IS more important to eliminate for using high contrast projectors than low contrast projectors. I would tell someone that a high contrast projector is wasted if they are going to have ambient light in the room from anther source other than the projector.

SirMaster 11-19-2019 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58841882)
Is that with the JVC X790R on high lamp mode? I typically use my Epson 6050 on medium or eco mode and it gives a good amount of brightness. With my JVC RS420, it was rather dim on low lamp mode. And after 700 hours on the first bulb, it was not that bright even on high lamp mode.

That is my fear if I get the X790R that it's low lamp output is closer to 1100 lumens with a new bulb.

Epson Natural mode:
High Bulb: 1979
Medium: 1542
Low: 1435

https://www.projectorcentral.com/Eps...,-Measurements


JVC RS440 Cinema/Natural/HDR: (they don't have the RS540 but it should be similar)

High Bulb: 1676
Low: 1162

But in my experience the JVC loses less than 100 lumens for calibration since it's stock modes are very close. The Epson loses somewhere around 200-300 lumens depending on the lamp mode when calibrating Natural as it's not as accurate out of the box.

FWIW my NX5 actually got slightly brighter (about 50 lumens) after running autocal, and the white balance, color temp, and gamma measurements all under 1dE so it's definitely pretty calibrated.

So after calibration, the JVC is around 1600 and 1100 lumens, and the Epson is around 1700, 1300, 1200 or so after calibration. So yes it's on average brighter, but not by much. I am not sure why your bulb dimmed so much in only 700 hours. The bulb on my NX5 which is the me bulb as your JVC is at 208 hours and has not dimmed at all so far. You can also get great bulbs from a respected member on this forum for JVC for only $135 which is really nice.

Anyways that my 2 cents.

Dilema 11-30-2019 05:27 AM

Let us know your findings. I had a chance to experience both and finally for 150 inch screen Epson worked much better for me. The only advantage of JVC were really dark scenes where blacks were blacker however with less shadow details than on Epson.

damelon 11-30-2019 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58893028)
Curiosity got the best of me, so I sold my Epson 6050UB and placed an order for the JVC RS-540 today. I hope it will be a discernible upgrade. If not, I really don't have any other options. I refuse to pay $5,000 for the NX5 with native contrast similar to my RS 420.

I picked up a used RS540 last fall when the new generation game out. The picture quality is incredible and contrast is amazing. I have a 130" wide screen, and it can get dim on dark scenes viewing HDR content, but dark scenes are an issue on any projector. (HDR is very lumen hungry) You really can't beat it for the price.... and there isn't much you can do to improve it unless you want to spend a lot more either. As people have said, they don't come with any built in tone mapping, but I play most content through my HTPC, and use MadVR for that. You can always use something like an Nvidia shield if you want as well.

Dilema 12-07-2019 12:46 AM

If you want brightness then Epson is much brighter than this JVC. I was comparing these side by side so this is correct info I am giving not a theoretical study. Moreover colors on Epson were more vivid thanks to that. Blacks some better on JVC but the difference was not huge.

Merlin GS 12-07-2019 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58926074)
If you want brightness then Epson is much brighter than this JVC. I was comparing these side by side so this is correct info I am giving not a theoretical study. Moreover colors on Epson were more vivid thanks to that. Blacks some better on JVC but the difference was not huge.

You may be right about the brightness, but did both projector bulbs have the same amount of usage? Were both projectors properly calibrated? Vividness of the colors very often pertains to calibration. Morever, if both projectors are properly calibrated, and the eyes have been given an opportunity to adjust to the light, the colors should be fairly similar (unless one of the projectors does not calibrate well, or technology comes into play).

Mike Garrett 12-07-2019 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58926074)
If you want brightness then Epson is much brighter than this JVC. I was comparing these side by side so this is correct info I am giving not a theoretical study. Moreover colors on Epson were more vivid thanks to that. Blacks some better on JVC but the difference was not huge.

More vivid, just means the color was off more on the Epson. Both the Epson and the JVC calibrates to 100% Rec709. So when calibrated, color would look the same. Yes the Epson is much brighter if using dynamic mode, but color is so far off in that mode that pretty much no one uses it. Calibrated the Epson is only slightly brighter than the JVC. But if you want to use the DCI p3 color filter with your HDR sources, then the JVC is brighter than the Epson. Contrast is better with the JVC and the JVC in high lamp is quieter than the Epson in high lamp. Harder to find an RS540 these days, not many left available.

Krbass 12-07-2019 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Garrett (Post 58928106)
More vivid, just means the color was off more on the Epson. Both the Epson and the JVC calibrates to 100% Rec709. So when calibrated, color would look the same. Yes the Epson is much brighter if using dynamic mode, but color is so far off in that mode that pretty much no one uses it. Calibrated the Epson is only slightly brighter than the JVC. But if you want to use the DCI p3 color filter with your HDR sources, then the JVC is brighter than the Epson. Contrast is better with the JVC and the JVC in high lamp is quieter than the Epson in high lamp. Harder to find an RS540 these days, not many left available.

I was going to say pretty much this. My eyes after a couple hours comparing the X790 and 5050ub had the JVC win in every category. Again this is not to say that the Epson is a slouch, it's a very good projector but if you can get a good deal on an x790(rs540) and have a bat cave you will be very pleased with what JVC offers over the rest of the competition.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

SirMaster 12-07-2019 01:56 PM

The epson will be somewhat brighter than the JVC. But unless you are using a screen larger than like 150” or using a projector in a room that you need to combat ambient light then I would get the JVC as it will be better in every other way and is plenty of brightness for a dark dedicated room.

Dilema 12-07-2019 02:52 PM

2 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Garrett (Post 58928106)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58926074)
If you want brightness then Epson is much brighter than this JVC. I was comparing these side by side so this is correct info I am giving not a theoretical study. Moreover colors on Epson were more vivid thanks to that. Blacks some better on JVC but the difference was not huge.

More vivid, just means the color was off more on the Epson. Both the Epson and the JVC calibrates to 100% Rec709. So when calibrated, color would look the same. Yes the Epson is much brighter if using dynamic mode, but color is so far off in that mode that pretty much no one uses it. Calibrated the Epson is only slightly brighter than the JVC. But if you want to use the DCI p3 color filter with your HDR sources, then the JVC is brighter than the Epson. Contrast is better with the JVC and the JVC in high lamp is quieter than the Epson in high lamp. Harder to find an RS540 these days, not many left available.

I don’t agree with you. I had these projectors for examination for long enough to compare.

Epson is a lot brighter not in just dynamic mode which I never used. It is much much brighter in natural which I have calibrated for hdr. The pallets coverage is circa 90% of BT in that mode and is really good enough for great hdr highlights. For me picture from Epson was more 3 dimensional.

When it comes to epson in digital cinema mode with filter I didnt like it at all. It definitely takes too much light away what is comparable to JVC.

Therefore when it is actually much brighter colors look much more pleasant are richer more beautiful. In HDR especially and these reds and greens are stunning.

I agree JVC is great for small/ medium screens but please do not recommend it over for big screens since Epson gives much more joy in my experience.

Both projectors were new same lamp usage. And JVC is not much quieter actually in my setup ( big dedicates media room with decent sound system) JVC is moderate loud in high lamp while Epson is louder but once movie starts Epson fan goes slower after a minute what make noise much more closer to JVC. Surprisingly none of the experts here mention that 😉.

I believe a lot of people didn’t spend enough time actually watching movies with one or other of these projectors and are quite radical in assessments. I really don't know how someone can tell JVC is much better hands down. I experienced these myself watching movies and chosen Epson cause it gave me much more pleasant and joy picture on my really big screen.

I did circa 500 hours and know this machine quite well. I am in projectors last 16 years thus maybe not an expert but neither a rookie 😉

I am waiting for JVC with Epson brightness for reasonable price. Currently only RS3000 meets my perfect picture expectations (which I know quite well as well) but price is too high.

Krbass 12-07-2019 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58928416)
I don’t agree with you. I had these projectors for examination for long enough to compare.

Epson is a lot brighter not in just dynamic mode which I never used. It is much much brighter in natural which I have calibrated for hdr. The pallets coverage is circa 90% of BT in that mode and is really good enough for great hdr highlights. For me picture from Epson was more 3 dimensional.

When it comes to epson in digital cinema mode with filter I didnt like it at all. It definitely takes too much light away what is comparable to JVC.

Therefore when it is actually much brighter colors look much more pleasant are richer more beautiful. In HDR especially and these reds and greens are stunning.

I agree JVC is great for small/ medium screens but please do not recommend it over for big screens since Epson gives much more joy in my experience.

Both projectors were new same lamp usage. And JVC is not much quieter actually in my setup ( big dedicates media room with decent sound system) JVC is moderate loud in high lamp while Epson is louder but once movie starts Epson fan goes slower after a minute what make noise much more closer to JVC. Surprisingly none of the experts here mention that 😉.

I believe a lot of people didn’t spend enough time actually watching movies with one or other of these projectors and are quite radical in assessments. I really don't know how someone can tell JVC is much better hands down. I experienced these myself watching movies and chosen Epson cause it gave me much more pleasant and joy picture on my really big screen.

I did circa 500 hours and know this machine quite well. I am in projectors last 16 years thus maybe not an expert but neither a rookie 😉

I am waiting for JVC with Epson brightness for reasonable price. Currently only RS3000 meets my perfect picture expectations (which I know quite well as well) but price is too high.

Obviously everyone has a different opinion. My observations were in a very blacked out room with both projectors shooting on to a 130" spandex screen. The owner of the 5050(one of my closest friends) was blown away by the black level the X790 can achieve. I know black level isn't everything but in my eyes if you have that level of light control it made the colors pop more. Switching back and forth between them we noticed a clear difference, even another friend who doesn't even care about any of the technical stuff thought the JVC put out a picture that just had more depth.

End of the day buy what you like and enjoy the purchase. I think the 5050 is the current best bang for the buck purchase of 2019 and would have had one if it wasn't for the deal I got on the X790.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Dilema 12-08-2019 01:08 AM

2 Attachment(s)
JVC black are better therefore really dark scenes look better including colors at these scenes on that machine. However when you rightly set up Epson the blacks on hdr are not bad at all. You need to do some tricks with gamma, lowering brightness setting and colours tweaks. This requires to know the machine better. It is also important to feed it with 4:4:4 signal what gives better results than 4:2:2. what is strange on movies.

So JVC blacks are superior in the really dark scenes however all mixed and bright scenes to me Epson looked better and this is 90 % of movie time in average. HDR lookes more like action is happening next to me. The screen is big what makes the effect of being next to action stronger thus the final effect is as I described to me.

During the years I always had “darker” projectors as always it was said they gave great picture. But now I am more happy with brighter one while the sharpness, colors, hdr, and shadow details are also great.

And one note: my experience is with TW9400 what is equivalent of 6050ub I believe. And with JVC RS540 what is the reference series with the carefully picked up components.

coderguy 12-10-2019 12:28 AM

Depends on your screen size, I think the brightness of the JVC's are about the same as the previous series.
They are rated by JVC about the same lumens as before.

You could look into a dual-projector setup as well, if you are concerned about specific things.

The one exception (someone can correct me if I am wrong) is if you are using a scope A-Lens, I guess the larger panel of the 4k allows more light to be trapped by the lens?

LCD has a bit of a rougher image due to pixel fill, so a Native 4k projector like an RS-1000 should be a huge step up, but brightness is the most important thing regardless (if you don't have enough that is). Brightness is pretty much everything, if the image is not bright enough, then things will look dull and lifeless.

For an average user, I would base the calculations on 1000 lumens for a JVC, and 1500 for an Epson.
Both projectors are brighter than this, but this is ABOUT the brightness you retain after 500-1000 hours.

I don't know about others, but when I'm using a projector with an older lamp (right before I replace it), a torch mode is nice to have and I hardly care as much about color accuracy. Sure, I don't want to watch a purely green image, but I might not mind a dE of up to 10 if I can get a 50% brighter image, usually 5-8 is more bareable though.

Some people said their JVC lamps did not dim any, but in hearing from other JVC owners, most of them do still dim. 1/3rd brigtness loss at 1000 hours is the average range for UHP lamp based projectors. I have only seen one projector out of 20 measured to lose less than 10% of brightness at 1000 hours, it is usually a fluke and is just from environmental factors or getting a particularly lucky lamp. That said, haven't measured many newer projectors, but the tech hasn't changed that much, just better ballasts. The lamps are still similar designs, though slightly better QC for some projectors.

I still think Sony and Benq have the best lamps, based on what I've seen. Also, Viewsonics tend to have long-lasting lamps, not sure why.

markmon1 12-10-2019 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58937912)
I picked up a JVC X790R from Bestbuy Magnolia on Friday. After two days with this projector, I was left unimpressed. Image appeared noticeably dimmer than the Epson 6050UB in low lamp and high lamp modes. Native contrast with iris wide open was impressive and the image was a bit sharper than what the 6050UB was capable of.

But there was no pop to the picture. Colors look flat and image is just too dim for my liking. JVC's fan on low mode was ok but it was annoyingly loud on high mode. I'm sure most JVC users are in light controlled rooms but I just can see how anyone could prefer such a dim image. And knowing that was with a fresh bulb, things would only get worst from here. So I returned the projector on Sunday.

Only options I have now is JVC RS1000, a used Sony 695ES or go back down to EPSON 5050/6050. I'm wondering if JVC improved the brightness on the RS1000? Or if the Sony 695ES is any brighter?

JVC uses the same lamps in the RS1000, 2000, 3000 as they did in the RS400, 500, 600, RS420, 520, 620, RS440, 540, 640. So brightness has not changed. The RS1000 will be the same as the RS540. The sony 695ES is dimmer yet. On high lamp the jvc and sony are about the same. But on low lamp sony runs 55% of high lamp while JVC runs at 72% of high lamp. My Sony 675ES (same lamp, same brightness specs as 695ES) ran 1600 lumens high lamp and 890 lumens low lamp. My RS500 ran 1250 lumens low lamp and 1750 lumens high lamp with 2880 hours on the bulb.

If you're not in a purely light controlled room, you are not going to benefit from the far far better blacks on the JVC over the Epson anyway. To that end, if you're not in a properly light controlled room, you might consider one of the BenQ lasers or such. The LK970 was going for under $3K refurb at benqdirect last week. 5000 lumens and much closer to native 4K than your epson.

Dilema 12-10-2019 02:50 AM

2 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58937912)
I picked up a JVC X790R from Bestbuy Magnolia on Friday. After two days with this projector, I was left unimpressed. Image appeared noticeably dimmer than the Epson 6050UB in low lamp and high lamp modes. Native contrast with iris wide open was impressive and the image was a bit sharper than what the 6050UB was capable of.

But there was no pop to the picture. Colors look flat and image is just too dim for my liking. JVC's fan on low mode was ok but it was annoyingly loud on high mode. I'm sure most JVC users are in light controlled rooms but I just can see how anyone could prefer such a dim image. And knowing that was with a fresh bulb, things would only get worst from here. So I returned the projector on Sunday.

Only options I have now is JVC RS1000, a used Sony 695ES or go back down to EPSON 5050/6050. I'm wondering if JVC improved the brightness on the RS1000? Or if the Sony 695ES is any brighter?

This is what I have experienced as well. I told you exactly the same. I have preferred Epson over JVC.
And someone above writes above here that we are comparing to torch mode. This is not correct. Natural mode which is 100% color for SDR and can be adjusted to approx 90% color coverage for UHD is much brighter than JVC. It is not using filter. Epsons filter modes are not great comparing to natural mode.

coderguy 12-10-2019 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markmon1 (Post 58938056)
My RS500 ran 1250 lumens low lamp and 1750 lumens high lamp with 2880 hours on the bulb.

If you're not in a purely light controlled room, you are not going to benefit from the far far better blacks on the JVC over the Epson anyway. To that end, if you're not in a properly light controlled room, you might consider one of the BenQ lasers or such. The LK970 was going for under $3K refurb at benqdirect last week. 5000 lumens and much closer to native 4K than your epson.

It happens, but that is not the norm, that's rare. Generally you see much faster drop-off.
I had a lamp in a Benq w7000 only lose 15% at 1200 hours, but the next lamp lost 45% in the same time.
Both lamps were new from the MFR, my Benq projector came with two lamps due to a special deal.

So you just never know really, but the 1/3rd at 1000 hours is a good metric.

My $2500 Benq is now essentially worthless, because the lamps STILL cost $300 a pop, and older 1080p DLP's are not selling for much anymore.
Normally, I'd go with aftermarket, but the lamp market for that PJ is flooded with 'used' bulbs ("fakes"), and the projector no longer fits in my new room properly anyhow, so why waste money, I'll have to sell it.

coderguy 12-10-2019 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58938098)
This is what I have experienced as well. I told you exactly the same. I have preferred Epson over JVC.
And someone above writes above here that we are comparing to torch mode. This is not correct. Natural mode which is 100% color for SDR and can be adjusted to approx 90% color coverage for UHD is much brighter than JVC. It is not using filter. Epsons filter modes are not great comparing to natural mode.

Maybe not torch mode, but I am pretty sure your dE is going to be higher than you think if you scan saturation tracking at all points, as well as use the newer calibration methods, and not just do the basic gamma / grayscale. The Epson is definitely brighter than the JVC overall, no question about it. Per calibrated numbers, I've seen mixed results, but you should be able to calibrate it brighter than a JVC, but not a whole lot brighter. It just depends on how much of a 'purist' calibration we are speaking of.

I mean an Epson does 2600-2800 Max Lumens in Torch mode on a new lamp, whereas a JVC can do 1900-2200 usually in torch mode. However, the Epson quickly comes down to around 2000 or less calibrated, whereas the JVC is still around 1600-1800. That sounds like a big difference, but they should be within 300 lumens calibrated generally speaking, which isn't all that much.

I'm sure there are some modes that look good that are brighter, but to get the max brightness difference does mean a torch mode.
LCOS torch mode isn't nearly as far out of whack as an LCD's torch mode, and LCOS lose much less lumens in calibration.

coderguy 12-10-2019 05:14 AM

Very very low, contrast will be poor compared to the Epson you sold off.

Do you really need that much brightness, that higher-end Benq DLP' is only the pick if you need an ultra-bright image.
Honestly, I'd look at a less expensive DLP as a holdover until you find what you want, then sell the DLP.

https://www.projectorcentral.com/Vie...-4K-review.htm

The PX727-4K is in many respects the most elegant of this new group of 4K projectors when all aspects of picture quality are taken together as a whole--image sharpness, color balance, contrast, saturation, image stability, and a natural smoothness that will appeal to the videophile. It does not have the black levels of the Optoma UH50, the UHD60, or the Vivitek HK2288, nor does it have the 3D of the BenQ HT2550, but in many other important aspects it can exceed the performance of these more expensive competitors, each of which has flaws of their own.

You could also look at an Optoma 51ALV or Optoma 51A.

SirMaster 12-10-2019 06:39 AM

JVC RS540 vs Epson 5050UB
 
Well at least for the JVCs you can get new bulbs for $135 a pop from a forum member here so replacing them at 1000 hours or maybe even less doesn’t even seem so crazy for many of us with out usage patterns.

That is if you actually need peak brightness.

My NX5 is doing 1200 lumens calibrated in low bulb so far with 300 hours. And it’s plenty to light up my 140” screen for HDR.

coderguy 12-10-2019 07:35 AM

What was the reading at new and what type of meter?

SirMaster 12-10-2019 08:19 AM

https://www.amazon.com/AEMC-CA813-Fu.../dp/B008S0AHSY

It's measuring the same as it was when it was new. I've been measuring it almost every time after I use it, since February and I have not measured any drop yet.

I also see about 1600 lumens in high bulb, but I don't normally use high.

Mike Garrett 12-10-2019 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coderguy (Post 58938100)
It happens, but that is not the norm, that's rare. Generally you see much faster drop-off.
I had a lamp in a Benq w7000 only lose 15% at 1200 hours, but the next lamp lost 45% in the same time.
Both lamps were new from the MFR, my Benq projector came with two lamps due to a special deal.

So you just never know really, but the 1/3rd at 1000 hours is a good metric.

My $2500 Benq is now essentially worthless, because the lamps STILL cost $300 a pop, and older 1080p DLP's are not selling for much anymore.
Normally, I'd go with aftermarket, but the lamp market for that PJ is flooded with 'used' bulbs ("fakes"), and the projector no longer fits in my new room properly anyhow, so why waste money, I'll have to sell it.

For the last four/five years, JVC has had excellent lamps. Slow to dim and seldom have flicker problems. Less lamp issues than Sony. There have been a couple threads where people masured their lamps and not one of them experienced 1/3rd drop off at 1,000 hours.

TimHuey 12-11-2019 10:00 AM

They still have some Benq lk952..but honestly. Im testing one out right now and while the picture is amazing if I lower my translucent white sheer blinds and turn off the lights..who wants to do that while they are eating dinner or cleaning house or working. You just want a movie on in the back ground. The 5000lumen Benq lk952 struggles on the low APL scenes in my beachfront fully windowed living room. Im getting an ALR screen sample tomorrow from XYscreens I am hoping that puts the lk952 into the acceptable range. CNN FOX MSNBC BIG BANG THEORY etc are all fine to watch in any condition but movies struggle. The LK990 has another 1000 lumens at 6000 and im kinda hoping that might be the answer if the ALR screen isn't.

The laser is what convinced me to ignore the 6050 and a A Lens. I couldn't deal with the fact the projector was already at the low end of acceptable and at 250 hours bulb use it would be even worse.

filmgeek47 12-11-2019 11:59 AM

For what it's worth, my experience with the RS540 has been very different than ALRLIFE.

Post-calibration, it's sufficiently bright that for SDR content I'm running with the manual iris at -7 (Auto 2 DI) and still find it more than bright enough. Able to run fantastic HDR keeping the lamp set on low.

That said, I certainly wouldn't spend this much on a projector in a room with ambient light (frankly with ambient light I'd either go laser or just buy a TV). But for anyone else debating the RS540, I'm still floored by the picture quality.

Brightness is also very dependent on settings, color modes etc. Don't bother judging HDR brightness on one of these without putting in custom curves

To be clear, I'm not trying to knock ALRLIFE's impressions, just throwing out there that for those with a different room situation and preferences for brightness the RS540 simply kicks ass.

DaGamePimp 12-11-2019 06:05 PM

When I can get a new rs540/x790r for the current price of a new 5050ub I'll gladly return the 5050ub (which I may be doing anyway) and go for the JVC (having owned an RS40 for a couple years that had a ballast failure I would still like to return to JVC for their exceptional image).

I was going to go the used JVC route until I discovered (read their warranty) that they do not honor warranty beyond the initial buyer, so unless someone has added a third party extended warranty second hand JVC's appear to have no warranty even if they are a day old and new in box. If you buy a used unit on ebay then often times an aftermarket warranty can be added.


- Jason

Dilema 12-12-2019 11:57 PM

I seriously doubt that RS1000 will give you much better picture than RS540. It will be sharper. That’s it.
The only projector which is as bright as Epson and has all typical JVC advantages is RS3000. But it is sickly pricy as well.

Keep looking.

TimHuey 12-13-2019 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58951498)
I continue to read contradicting opinions on the LK 970/990 online. Some people rave about their overall picture quality. While others state they look awful with dark scenes with any space image appearing washed out with a grey haze over the image. Argh.

We, in the club of ARGH!!!!!, welcome our newest member.

SirMaster 12-13-2019 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58951506)
I seriously doubt that RS1000 will give you much better picture than RS540. It will be sharper. That’s it.
The only projector which is as bright as Epson and has all typical JVC advantages is RS3000. But it is sickly pricy as well.

Keep looking.



The RS3000 is the exact same brightness as the RS1000.

Or at least the 2 samples that I measured in the same position, same meter, same settings were.

They do use the same bulb after all.

Dilema 12-13-2019 02:45 AM

Well Sir not to my eyes based on real movies I watched on them. Also specs are different 1800 vs 2200 lumens.
This is very strange what you have said. Maybe there are some specific modes when they are equal. I am talking HDR performance and this is what I have seen personally.

Remember bulb maybe same but lenses are way way bigger on RS3000. Thus the price difference I guess.

coderguy 12-13-2019 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58951498)
I continue to read contradicting opinions on the LK 970/990 online. Some people rave about their overall picture quality. While others state they look awful with dark scenes with any space image appearing washed out with a grey haze over the image. Argh.

Seriously considering increasing my my budget for a JVC RS1000. Though I hate to purchase the entry level model in any product line. It usually leaves me wanting for more.

Some of this is user perception, some of it is how bright people have it set to, some of it is whether or not they are watching HDR, and some of it is what scenes they are watching.
There are dark scenes like "space scenes" where it will look good, such as if there is enough brightness in the image, but most are going to look so-so.

Per a dealer that has a shop near me that I drop by on occasion to discuss projectors, he had some weird issues with these Benqs, but he had a FIRST RUN shipment.
He didn't like the calibration. He offered to set it up for me, but I didn't want to give him the trouble. He basically said the blacks are slightly better than the regular OLD Benqs, like the w7000, but not miles better.
You have to understand though he is looking at it from an "hours worked" perspective, and since the Benqs were a PITA to calibrate, he actually swapped it out for a different model.
He's not an expert calibrator like ChadB or anything, but he's quite a decent calibrator.

You're going to need calibration equipment or pay a calibrator, it's a real pain. On the one he had, it was off by 15 dE and he had issues getting it under 10 dE without sacrificing brightness, but he was on the VERY edge because he was installing it for Landscaping place to do "Visualization before you buy" type setup. Too much red, and the greens looked funny, and normally he wouldn't care, but it made their "model lawns" look under-saturated at times and over-saturated at other times, which was a major problem for his install. There was one semi-accurate mode, but the gamma had issues in that mode, and it wasn't bright enough for him. The final straw for him was it losing some settings on a power cycle, he couldn't deal with all that in combination, so he returned it.

That is just one experience though, some members in this forum seem to love these things.

evanft 12-13-2019 07:58 AM

I went from a 5040 to an RS520, so a similar, though I imagine smaller, jump.

Worth every damn penny. I would do it again without hesitation. Across the board upgrade.

Luminated67 12-13-2019 08:14 AM

I've yet to do a direct side by side comparison between a JVC and my calibrated Epson 9400 but I did see an calibrated X5900 in a similar room to mine which afterwards I headed directly home and played to see scenes to compare. The JVC had better blacks but in my opinion the jump wasn't huge, definitely not the kind of jump I have been lead to believe when be seen between the two, also when playing 4K HDR I actually felt the Epson did a better job at handling HDR and dare I say IMO looked a little crisper too.

Probably in a side by side viewing the superior blacks might have been more noticeable but based on what I saw I didn't come away feeling that I needed to run out and trade my Epson for the JVC. I actually think switching to a grey screen would achieve a similar result to that of the JVC which might well me my next port of call.

Mike Garrett 12-13-2019 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58951498)
I continue to read contradicting opinions on the LK 970/990 online. Some people rave about their overall picture quality. While others state they look awful with dark scenes with any space image appearing washed out with a grey haze over the image. Argh.

Seriously considering increasing my my budget for a JVC RS1000. Though I hate to purchase the entry level model in any product line. It usually leaves me wanting for more.

What size screen?
What aspect ratio?
What fabric in your screen?
Is your screen dark and light controlled?
What do you want to use the projector for?
Will you be watching much HDR content?

Mike Garrett 12-13-2019 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58951506)
I seriously doubt that RS1000 will give you much better picture than RS540. It will be sharper. That’s it.
The only projector which is as bright as Epson and has all typical JVC advantages is RS3000. But it is sickly pricy as well.

Keep looking.

It will be sharper and cleaner. The RS1000 is quite a bit better with HDR.

coderguy 12-13-2019 11:40 AM

For 110"-120" screen (or less), I don't know why anyone would pick the Benq over a JVC, unless they just want to torch everyone out, or the throw distance doesn't work in a particular room. Unless someone was only buying a projector for pure gaming in bright scenes or sports only watching, or something like that, then it would make sense.

Of course there is the cost, but some of the Benqs aren't exactly cheap either unless you get a refurb deal, but even then it's only slightly cheaper than the entry-level JVC, depending which Benq we are referring to.

I would definitely suggest the JVC over any Benq.

If dead set on a Benq, then the ht9060 or even the ht5550 (not sure about sharpness on this unit) would actually be the home theater versions.
These others are light canons for bright rooms.

Mike Garrett 12-13-2019 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coderguy (Post 58951840)
Some of this is user perception, some of it is how bright people have it set to, some of it is whether or not they are watching HDR, and some of it is what scenes they are watching.
There are dark scenes like "space scenes" where it will look good, such as if there is enough brightness in the image, but most are going to look so-so.

Per a dealer that has a shop near me that I drop by on occasion to discuss projectors, he had some weird issues with these Benqs, but he had a FIRST RUN shipment.
He didn't like the calibration. He offered to set it up for me, but I didn't want to give him the trouble. He basically said the blacks are slightly better than the regular OLD Benqs, like the w7000, but not miles better.
You have to understand though he is looking at it from an "hours worked" perspective, and since the Benqs were a PITA to calibrate, he actually swapped it out for a different model.
He's not an expert calibrator like ChadB or anything, but he's quite a decent calibrator.

You're going to need calibration equipment or pay a calibrator, it's a real pain. On the one he had, it was off by 15 dE and he had issues getting it under 10 dE without sacrificing brightness, but he was on the VERY edge because he was installing it for Landscaping place to do "Visualization before you buy" type setup. Too much red, and the greens looked funny, and normally he wouldn't care, but it made their "model lawns" look under-saturated at times and over-saturated at other times, which was a major problem for his install. There was one semi-accurate mode, but the gamma had issues in that mode, and it wasn't bright enough for him. The final straw for him was it losing some settings on a power cycle, he couldn't deal with all that in combination, so he returned it.

That is just one experience though, some members in this forum seem to love these things.

Native contrast on these E-shifting projectors is actually lower that the older 1080p DLP's.

coderguy 12-13-2019 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Garrett (Post 58953578)
Native contrast on these E-shifting projectors is actually lower that the older 1080p DLP's.

Yah, but it's not enough to matter, it's almost the same.
The dynamic contrast on the newer ones work better, but it's not a huge improvement.

The DI on the older Benqs was somewhere between awful and downright pitiful.

coderguy 12-13-2019 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58937912)
I picked up a JVC X790R from Bestbuy Magnolia on Friday. After two days with this projector, I was left unimpressed. Image appeared noticeably dimmer than the Epson 6050UB in low lamp and high lamp modes. Native contrast with iris wide open was impressive and the image was a bit sharper than what the 6050UB was capable of.

But there was no pop to the picture. Colors look flat and image is just too dim for my liking. JVC's fan on low mode was ok but it was annoyingly loud on high mode. I'm sure most JVC users are in light controlled rooms but I just can see how anyone could prefer such a dim image. And knowing that was with a fresh bulb, things would only get worst from here. So I returned the projector on Sunday.

Only options I have now is JVC RS1000, a used Sony 695ES or go back down to EPSON 5050/6050. I'm wondering if JVC improved the brightness on the RS1000? Or if the Sony 695ES is any brighter?

Honestly, when I read this, my only conclusion is that you had a defective JVC unit, maybe not totally defective, but something might have messed up the default calibration or been wrong with the lamp. It happens, even though it is very rare with JVC, it can happen.

There is just no way if you had a 115" screen (even in a room with white walls) is a JVC not bright enough.
Unless you have some type of vision issue (and I don't mean that sarcastically), but in Lamp High you should have been able to get to 50 fL.

That is more than 3x the average brightness of your local cinema showing, 3x...

Unless you were just basing the comparison PURELY on the Epson vs. JVC brightness (that makes some sense), but then the JVC is still plenty bright enough.
Consider this, in the old days most of us put up with 8fL or less, and you can get up to 50 fL, even if using Eco mode you should have still gotten to 35.

SirMaster 12-13-2019 01:17 PM

JVC RS540 vs Epson 5050UB
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58951680)
Well Sir not to my eyes based on real movies I watched on them. Also specs are different 1800 vs 2200 lumens.
This is very strange what you have said. Maybe there are some specific modes when they are equal. I am talking HDR performance and this is what I have seen personally.

Remember bulb maybe same but lenses are way way bigger on RS3000. Thus the price difference I guess.



The RS3000 can get brighter, but that requires placing it very close to the screen.

Remember that brightness drops off with throw distance. The lens on the RS3000 has a larger throw range and thus can be placed closer to the screen while resulting in the same screen size.

This is where the lumen specs come from. Not everyone is going to place their RS3000 that close to their screen.

When I measured the RS3000 vs the RS1000 I put them in the same mount which is how people would normally install their projector in a specific location.

I measured multiple modes and they were the same brightness (within 0.1fc) when both projectors were mounted 21ft back from a 172” screen.

The bigger lens explains some brightness, but not 400 lumens. When placing both at their closest possible throw the RS3000 measures about 150 lumens higher. But at the same throw they were measuring the same.

Krbass 12-13-2019 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58955568)
I agree with your sentiments here. I have more than one screen. I switched to using a smaller screen in order to maximize brightness with a high contrast projector. If I went with a Benq DLP laser model, I would switch back to a 135" or a 150" screen. I never could understand why guys would pair a average lumen JVC with a monster screen over 130". Brightness will be below average with a fresh bulb. And will only get worse over time.

I agree that a larger screen needs serious lumens. My X790 is shooting on to a 128" center stage XD screen. It is very bright but my room is very dark with lots of triple black velvet. I don't think I've ever wanted it brighter in fact sometimes it is too bright.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk

Mike Garrett 12-13-2019 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58955548)
I've owned a JVC X500R, RS400, RS420, and recently the X790R. This is not my first JVC projector. And i've demoed many more. I know many in this forum love JVC projectors. I understand they show a beautiful picture in a room devoid of any ambient light.

With that being said, it is tiresome for members to constantly state they are "bright enough" without knowing what type of screens others are using, screen sizes, and personal tastes. Every JVC I've owned or demoed was on the dim side to me. 1200 lumens calibrated in low lamp mode is dim to my eyes.

I don't understand how so many people here seem to be impressed with such a low amount of lumens but at the same time I am not here to dismiss anyone's opinions. I have repeatedly purchased JVC projectors because I constantly feel the pressure of those with high end opinions who find JVC image quality impressive.

But at this time I have to be honest with myself. I love the high contrast and depth JVC projectors can produce. But JVC needs to make strides towards a brighter model. Same reasoning when guys point out DLP's lack of strides in the contrast dept. It is fair for me to point out JVC's lack of prowess in the brightness dept.

What size and aspect ratio is your screen?
What fabric in your screen?
What is your throw?

Mike Garrett 12-13-2019 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58955638)
I own more than one screen. I routinely swap them out depending on what projector I am using. My screens are 123" Stewart Studiotek 100, 135" Elunevision Aurora, 150" custom screen, 120" Parallax .8 and 115" Dark Energy Pulsar. My alr screens are ultra dark comparable to Parallax .8. All my screens are 16 by 9 aspect. I like to use the projector for viewing during the day with all blinds and drapes closed. Also watch it at night with one lamp on in the room or in complete darkness at night.
I don't watch much HDR content at the moment. Mainly upscaled bluray.

An RS1000 shooting onto your 1.0 gain 123" screen gives you 36FL calibrated. With the industry standard being a max of 16FL for SDR, I would not call the JVC dim or below average. You may want it much brighter, but that does not apply for most people. Keep in mind the LCD projectors once calibrated lose a ton of lumens. The LCOS/SXRD projectors do not lose very many lumens calibrated.

Dilema 12-14-2019 12:46 AM

You are not alone. I also use home theatre projectors over last 16 years and do it very intensively. I do 1000h on the lamp every year in average. So kind of heavy user I guess. I had so many projectors including JVC. These are great black and contrast projectors. And I honestly found that Epson due to its brightness is much more enjoyable in all around use including movies and games (which brightness is much higher than any JVC despite what some others are saying here desperately trying to false others that “calibrated brightness is about the same”). No is not the same because nobody will use Epson with a filter mode on larger screen. HDR on natural mode looks better than THX mode on JVC overall to me and I was ready to sacrifice some below 10% scenes where JVC blacks were ruling for 90% of scenes where Epson brightness and vivid colours were just more pleasant and more 3D to me. Since last 15 years I had dimmer projectors this one as first Epson I decided to own with its brightness and HDR performance make me smile every time I turn the movie on 🙂.

coderguy 12-14-2019 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58955638)
I own more than one screen. I routinely swap them out depending on what projector I am using. My screens are 123" Stewart Studiotek 100, 135" Elunevision Aurora, 150" custom screen, 120" Parallax .8 and 115" Dark Energy Pulsar. My alr screens are ultra dark comparable to Parallax .8. All my screens are 16 by 9 aspect. I like to use the projector for viewing during the day with all blinds and drapes closed. Also watch it at night with one lamp on in the room or in complete darkness at night.
I don't watch much HDR content on any projector at the moment. I don't find their HDR picture impressive so I always watch 4k blurays on my Oled TV in the living room.

You had originally stated 115" screen size earlier and that is why I thought you had that screen size.

SirMaster 12-14-2019 01:28 AM

I don't understand people saying JVC colors not being vivid. JVC color gamut meets essentially full coverage and full volume for SDR and for HDR color space (with the color filter). So they produce the colors as they should be. If the color was any more vivid then it wouldn't be accurate.

And I think what people mean for calibrated, is if you perform even a simple white balance calibration on the Epson Natural or Bright Cinema mode, you lose a couple hundred lumens. Where on a JVC you lose basically none in my experience with a white balance calibration.

Dilema 12-14-2019 07:29 AM

One thing is color gamut another thing is color brightness. Bright rich colors are more vivid. Epson is known from both white and color light brightness.

I would quit such calibration if I loose so much brightness. I agree that Such calibration would be pointless and instead making picture more pleasant it would make if more difficult.

My picture is bright and adjusted to my preferences and it’s really great in my opinion. I was not able to achieve that on RS540. Thus with light heart I dropped JVC and decided to stay with Epson.

Mike Garrett 12-14-2019 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58956042)
You are not alone. I also use home theatre projectors over last 16 years and do it very intensively. I do 1000h on the lamp every year in average. So kind of heavy user I guess. I had so many projectors including JVC. These are great black and contrast projectors. And I honestly found that Epson due to its brightness is much more enjoyable in all around use including movies and games (which brightness is much higher than any JVC despite what some others are saying here desperately trying to false others that “calibrated brightness is about the same”). No is not the same because nobody will use Epson with a filter mode on larger screen. HDR on natural mode looks better than THX mode on JVC overall to me and I was ready to sacrifice some below 10% scenes where JVC blacks were ruling for 90% of scenes where Epson brightness and vivid colours were just more pleasant and more 3D to me. Since last 15 years I had dimmer projectors this one as first Epson I decided to own with its brightness and HDR performance make me smile every time I turn the movie on 🙂.

THX mode on the JVC uses the color filter, even with SDR content. So you are losing a lot of brightness. Use Natural mode, it will be brighter and closer calibrated out of the box. Both Epson and JVC calibrate to 100% Rec709, so if properly calibrated, the color is the same.

coderguy 12-14-2019 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58956600)
One thing is color gamut another thing is color brightness. Bright rich colors are more vivid. Epson is known from both white and color light brightness.

I would quit such calibration if I loose so much brightness. I agree that Such calibration would be pointless and instead making picture more pleasant it would make if more difficult.

My picture is bright and adjusted to my preferences and it’s really great in my opinion. I was not able to achieve that on RS540. Thus with light heart I dropped JVC and decided to stay with Epson.

Given that there is color saturation, color luminance, and color hue...
Each of the above can affect the image, when a projector is in brighter modes, it has higher color luminance but often the hue and saturation are de-balanced.
The unbalancing of the saturation tracking is harder to see, but using something like Calman and a good meter you can notice it.

The problem is things may look right, but the eye cannot really tell, a very highly trained eye can ONLY tell to some degree.
The issue is how different lighting looks mixed with saturation points to fool you into thinking it was correct under normal lighting.

So I can look at people in a bright scene and everything looks normal, but then in a dark scene people's faces have too much color.

Are the colored faces from the scene's lighting or from the projector causing it?

I don't even trust my meters, because I don't have $1500 meters like some do, just a c6.
What I do is calibrate the image first, then I use a small TV that I know is accurate and place it next to the image, then I make minor adjustments after watching.

Even this is very tricky, but after some practice it becomes second nature. It's easier just to calibrate the image, but some projectors have specific weaknesses when you over-calibrate them, so in that case I prefer to compromise, which is why I often reference another display in real-time.

Dilema 12-14-2019 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Garrett (Post 58957534)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58956042)
You are not alone. I also use home theatre projectors over last 16 years and do it very intensively. I do 1000h on the lamp every year in average. So kind of heavy user I guess. I had so many projectors including JVC. These are great black and contrast projectors. And I honestly found that Epson due to its brightness is much more enjoyable in all around use including movies and games (which brightness is much higher than any JVC despite what some others are saying here desperately trying to false others that “calibrated brightness is about the same”). No is not the same because nobody will use Epson with a filter mode on larger screen. HDR on natural mode looks better than THX mode on JVC overall to me and I was ready to sacrifice some below 10% scenes where JVC blacks were ruling for 90% of scenes where Epson brightness and vivid colours were just more pleasant and more 3D to me. Since last 15 years I had dimmer projectors this one as first Epson I decided to own with its brightness and HDR performance make me smile every time I turn the movie on 🙂.

THX mode on the JVC uses the color filter, even with SDR content. So you are losing a lot of brightness. Use Natural mode, it will be brighter and closer calibrated out of the box. Both Epson and JVC calibrate to 100% Rec709, so if properly calibrated, the color is the same.

Are other modes capable for HDR on JVC? I watch mostly UHD and mostly 4K material. Thought THX is the mode to use for this. On Epson using natural on HDR i have 88% color coverage ( what is more than good enough for me)and great brightnes colors and hdr highlights. This is what I am using.

Dilema 12-14-2019 01:00 PM

2 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by coderguy (Post 58957724)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58956600)
One thing is color gamut another thing is color brightness. Bright rich colors are more vivid. Epson is known from both white and color light brightness.

I would quit such calibration if I loose so much brightness. I agree that Such calibration would be pointless and instead making picture more pleasant it would make if more difficult.

My picture is bright and adjusted to my preferences and it’️s really great in my opinion. I was not able to achieve that on RS540. Thus with light heart I dropped JVC and decided to stay with Epson.

Given that there is color saturation, color luminance, and color hue...
Each of the above can affect the image, when a projector is in brighter modes, it has higher color luminance but often the hue and saturation are de-balanced.
The unbalancing of the saturation tracking is harder to see, but using something like Calman and a good meter you can notice it.

The problem is things may look right, but the eye cannot really tell, a very highly trained eye can ONLY tell to some degree.
The issue is how different lighting looks mixed with saturation points to fool you into thinking it was correct under normal lighting.

So I can look at people in a bright scene and everything looks normal, but then in a dark scene people's faces have too much color.

Are the colored faces from the scene's lighting or from the projector causing it?

I don't even trust my meters, because I don't have $1500 meters like some do, just a c6.
What I do is calibrate the image first, then I use a small TV that I know is accurate and place it next to the image, then I make minor adjustments after watching.

Even this is very tricky, but after some practice it becomes second nature. It's easier just to calibrate the image, but some projectors have specific weaknesses when you over-calibrate them, so in that case I prefer to compromise, which is why I often reference another display in real-time.

You right in all theory and as you said only well trained eye can notice something is a bit not right. Every time you switch on the projector it burns the lamp and picture changes a bit.

Do I care about that little differences ? No. Why ? Cause I asses picture based on what I like. And I know what I like cause I have some experience over years. Seen probably over 1000 movies on projector and finished tens of video games.

This is why I have chosen projector With which I have managed to achieve more pleasant picture not the one which having a 1000 usd meter would give me better parameters.

I know for professional calibrators it may be hard to understand but some people actually watch content on projectors and may prefer the overall experience over the ideal parameters.

MississippiMan 12-15-2019 02:40 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Krbass (Post 58955580)
I agree that a larger screen needs serious lumens. My X790 is shooting on to a 128" center stage XD screen. It is very bright but my room is very dark with lots of triple black velvet. I don't think I've ever wanted it brighter in fact sometimes it is too bright.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk


Using this venue to get the diagram to you.

Mike Garrett 12-15-2019 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dilema (Post 58957962)
Are other modes capable for HDR on JVC? I watch mostly UHD and mostly 4K material. Thought THX is the mode to use for this. On Epson using natural on HDR i have 88% color coverage ( what is more than good enough for me)and great brightnes colors and hdr highlights. This is what I am using.

Then on the JVC you would use HDR mode. That is without DCI P3 color filter. That mode gives yo 87% to 90% DCI color space.

talon95 12-16-2019 03:19 AM

Has anyone gone to the effort of trying to determine what color range is really used by most UHD content? I can never tell a significant difference when I flip my RS540 between HDR and BT2020 (no filter/filter), so I've stopped using the color filter.

coderguy 12-16-2019 05:00 AM

TV's do tiny scope images for movies due to black bars, and you have to mask the TV :)
A 77" 16:9 produces a 73" 2.35 image, and 85" inch produces an 80" one.

So compared to people using 120" scope screens, we are talking 73" - 80" vs. 120"...

The TV image is tiny, once they get into the 90"+ range, then it might be more worth it.
100", then even I'd be somewhat considering a TV, though scope images will still be too small.

JVC's are plenty bright enough for almost everyone up to about 120" to 130".
After 130", it becomes subjective, but most people can still make due up to about 140".
After that, it becomes a lot worse, for sure.

Dilema 12-16-2019 05:28 AM

I was not aware HDR mode not using filter. Anyways I mostly watched RS540 on UHD in the mode which turns on automatically. Is it HDR or THX? I can’t remember now since it was a while when I had to make the call on it.

Mike Garrett 12-16-2019 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58963740)
I became tired of waiting on a refurb LK970 to become available. So I purchased a a refurb LK952. It should be here in a few days. It will at least give me an idea of what I could expect performance wise from the LK 970. I watched a video review of the HT9060 and I was not impressed. Dark scenes looked washed out and milky grey.

If the LK952 appears as bad then I will definitely return it. On sunday I viewed another demo of the NX5 and I just can't justify the price. Picture quality is not as good as my Sony 77" oled. The JVC would only have adequate brightness with a smaller 110" or 106" screen for my liking. That takes away the biggest benefit of going with a projector which is immersion.

That is why I have such a hard time justifying any of my JVC purchases. They are not bright enough for massive 130" to 150" screens in my opinion. And if you going with a smaller 100" to 110" screen, you can get a superior image from a 77" oled or a comparable picture from a 85" Sony 950G or Samsung Q70.

If you are looking for a projector that can beat the image quality of an OLED, you are never going to find one. The JVC's come the closest. You definitely are not going to find it going with DLP.

We have gone through this before. With an RS1000 shooting onto a 130" 1.3 gain screen you can get 41FL. That is brighter than you need for good HDR, using JVC's dynamic tone mapping. So a JVC can easily handle a 130" and even larger screen. Now if you are talking a low gain large screen, then that is a different matter, but you can't just throw it out there that the JVC can't handle a 130" or larger screen, when I can clearly show by the math, that it can.

SirMaster 12-16-2019 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58963740)
I became tired of waiting on a refurb LK970 to become available. So I purchased a a refurb LK952. It should be here in a few days. It will at least give me an idea of what I could expect performance wise from the LK 970. I watched a video review of the HT9060 and I was not impressed. Dark scenes looked washed out and milky grey.



If the LK952 appears as bad then I will definitely return it. On sunday I viewed another demo of the NX5 and I just can't justify the price. Picture quality is not as good as my Sony 77" oled. The JVC would only have adequate brightness with a smaller 110" or 106" screen for my liking. That takes away the biggest benefit of going with a projector which is immersion.



That is why I have such a hard time justifying any of my JVC purchases. They are not bright enough for massive 130" to 150" screens in my opinion. And if you going with a smaller 100" to 110" screen, you can get a superior image from a 77" oled or a comparable picture from a 85" Sony 950G or Samsung Q70.



Are you using your projector in a room with ambient light?

Otherwise it just seems weird to me about the brightness not being enough.

I use my NX5 on a 140” 1.1 gain white screen and I use low bulb which is more than bright enough.

High bulb is simply too bright and actually hurts my eyes and makes me squint in the bright scenes.

Hawkmarket 12-16-2019 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMaster (Post 58964940)
Are you using your projector in a room with ambient light?

Otherwise it just seems weird to me about the brightness not being enough.

I use my NX5 on a 140” 1.1 gain white screen and I use low bulb which is more than bright enough.

High bulb is simply too bright and actually hurts my eyes and makes me squint in the bright scenes.


I have to laugh at this thread with the extremes being described. One person can't believe how dull the picture is while the other is darn near blinded. It's good to have a baseline to measure from regarding fl such as movie theater's, Dolby Vision theater's and then you have to mix in the subjective nature of personal preference.

Mike Garrett 12-16-2019 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkmarket (Post 58966584)
I have to laugh at this thread with the extremes being described. One person can't believe how dull the picture is while the other is darn near blinded. It's good to have a baseline to measure from regarding fl such as movie theater's, Dolby Vision theater's and then you have to mix in the subjective nature of personal preference.

A lot of these differences can be explained by the room. Take a large 35FL SDR image in a fully blacked out room. That will be so bright that it could give a person eye strain. Take that same screen with 35FL SDR image and place it in a room with a lot of ambient light and the same person that said it was too bright and giving him eye strain, may now feel the image is not very bright and dull looking.

Dilema 12-17-2019 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkmarket (Post 58966584)
Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMaster (Post 58964940)
Are you using your projector in a room with ambient light?

Otherwise it just seems weird to me about the brightness not being enough.

I use my NX5 on a 140” 1.1 gain white screen and I use low bulb which is more than bright enough.

High bulb is simply too bright and actually hurts my eyes and makes me squint in the bright scenes.


I have to laugh at this thread with the extremes being described. One person can't believe how dull the picture is while the other is darn near blinded. It's good to have a baseline to measure from regarding fl such as movie theater's, Dolby Vision theater's and then you have to mix in the subjective nature of personal preference.

Have You seen these projectors side by side same time after being adjusted to its best for your liking? Have you spend quality amount of time with both? Do you have media room with white celling and nearly 160 inch screen? Do you use projector for quite a lot of gaming where people popping in a lot and ambient light is present?

I did all of and I am not nearly blind. I am very picky to have great picture actually. So before you judge laugh or offend other people just honour others preferences and choices.
Looks like some JVC owners are over sensitive when someone is claiming that other projector may be overall more enjoyable for their use and conditions. Don’t know why is that.

coderguy 12-17-2019 04:22 AM

It's not about personal tastes in this case, it's that in almost all cases at these screen sizes, the JVC would be bright enough for MOST people. Most people in the 3k+ threads do not have any ambient light, and even with white walls (slightly more borderline), should still be do-able at those sizes.

So your situation is an outlier, and we're not going to recommend things based on outliers, or the exceptions.

Mike Garrett 12-17-2019 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58967410)
Notice I clearly said "for my liking" and "in my opinion".

You missed my whole point. You can't just list a screen size and say so and so projector can't light up a 130" and above screen. You have to also list what gain screen you are talking about. Has nothing to do with your opinion or liking. Lets say your opinion/liking is an image that is 40FL. A projector with 2,000 calibrated lumens shooting onto a 110" diagonal 16:9 0.7 gain screen can't get there. Does that mean a 2,000 calibrated lumen projector is not bright enough to light up a 110" and larger screen? We could be talking about a 1,600 calibrated lumen projector shooting onto a 140" diagonal 16:9 1.5 gain screen and it can do above 40FL. So should we say this projector is good for 140" size screens? Really when talking about what is bright enough, we would need to consider screen size, screen aspect ratio, screen gain, Throw and the room. Then preference comes into play.

In a good blacked out light controlled room, you may be surprised, that most people do think a 14FL to 16FL image is bright enough for SDR on a properly set up projector. They may think they are not, but after seeing such a setup, most change their minds. Heck, I thought I liked 18FL to 20FL for SDR, but after getting my system properly calibrated, I was very pleased with the 16FL image it was set up for. Definitely nice and bright, but I do have a black pit of a room with a lot of black velvet.

Mike Garrett 12-17-2019 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58967430)
I paid for overnight shipping, so the Benq LK952 will be here in the morning. Won't take me long to figure out if it's black levels are acceptable when using it with one of my dark alr screens. If not, then I will go back down to the 5050, Sony 295ES, used Sony 695ES or look for an open box NX5/RS1000. I'm not paying retail for 1100 lumens in eco mode and native contrast down in the 20000:1 range. But I would be willing to buy a open box return as long as it comes with warranty.

The 695 can't do 20,000:1 native. Neither can the RS1000/NX5, if talking about iris fully open. You can get above 20,000:1 by closing down the iris in the RS1000/NX5, but will cost you a fair amount of light output.

DavidHir 12-17-2019 07:52 AM

I think 80% of the debates about projectors on this forum are because of the rooms. Someone with a true black pit vs something else greatly changes the way these units can look and how contrast can be perceived or not. People with real black rooms are often using JVCs for a good reason. If your room is not real good, then it matters a lot less what you use so long as you can get enough brightness. All of the latest 4K projectors are going to produce a sharpness that is very similar, but contrast is where the difference can show if the room can handle it.

Mike Garrett 12-17-2019 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58968040)
From what I can see, this appears to be a common theme here at AVS. Some members here tend to project their personal tastes on others. A lower lumen, high contrast projector is not the end all, be all when it comes to picture quality. Black floor is not the number one priority for overall picture quality and enjoyment. Dark scenes make up the minority of most movies.

And most of my guests do not want to sit in a dark room devoid of any light for three hours or more. My parents tripping over things because they can't see. Telling teens to keep their phones off as to not interfere with the image in a dark room etc. I enjoy a high quality picture as much as anyone. But I don't put contrast above all other factors when deciding on a purchase.

And I typically enjoy the image quality of Sony projectors more than JVC, even though Sony projectors have much lower native contrast. A good black floor is a necessary component of a good image, but it is not the sole deciding factor.

Nearly half of all movies have an average ADL of less than 5%. A lot more dark scenes in movies than bright scenes on average. Heck the average ADL in the Art of Flight is 32% and that has got to be one of the brightest movies out there. You would be shocked to see the ADL numbers for some scenes that you think are bright. The numbers will be a lot lower than you think.
http://projectiondream.com/en/movie-...-measurements/

Mike Garrett 12-17-2019 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidHir (Post 58968868)
I think 80% of the debates about projectors on this forum are because of the rooms. Someone with a true black pit vs something else greatly changes the way these units can look and how contrast can be perceived or not. People with real black rooms are often using JVCs for a good reason. If your room is not real good, then it matters a lot less what you use so long as you can get enough brightness. All of the latest 4K projectors are going to produce a sharpness that is very similar, but contrast is where the difference can show if the room can handle it.

Yep. I said the same thing in post 92. :)

SirMaster 12-17-2019 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Garrett (Post 58968784)
The 695 can't do 20,000:1 native. Neither can the RS1000/NX5, if talking about iris fully open. You can get above 20,000:1 by closing down the iris in the RS1000/NX5, but will cost you a fair amount of light output.

The NX5 is definitely about 20,000:1 native fully open. It increases to around 35,000:1 - 40,000:1 as you close down the iris. Multiple people have measured this.

Mike Garrett 12-17-2019 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58969300)
Do not add words to my post. I clearly stated "in my opinion" in my previous posts. I did not try to pass my opinion off as scientific fact.

But you only stated size. Gain has as much to do with brightness as size. If you had said in my opinion a JVC is not bright enough to light up a 130" or larger 1.0 gain screen, that would make sense, whether I agreed with it or not. :)

Dilema 12-17-2019 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coderguy (Post 58968236)
It's not about personal tastes in this case, it's that in almost all cases at these screen sizes, the JVC would be bright enough for MOST people. Most people in the 3k+ threads do not have any ambient light, and even with white walls (slightly more borderline), should still be do-able at those sizes.

So your situation is an outlier, and we're not going to recommend things based on outliers, or the exceptions.

I believe this is another false statement. When I was at the dealer to get these projections for test and said about my conditions. They explained not to worry about white celling as they make installations for clients and MAJORITY are installed in living rooms or other rooms where white celling is present.
I also doubt all JVC owners have dedicated home cinema rooms all black.

I could have one but for me is simply impractical. My media room is used for movies but also for sitting in front of computer, we play Texas Holden there with my buddies and drink. and I spend a lot of time gaming. It can be made without any ambient light and I always watch movies like that. However when I game or sit on internet doors are opened and I have contact with rest of the family not isolating myself.

Anyways I doubt such use could be used as extreme and I can bet it is very popular setup.

coderguy 12-17-2019 01:32 PM

Thanks for the misquote.

Read what I wrote again, I said ambient light. I admitted a lot have white walls, but few have "permanent" ambient light in 3k+ threads (there are a few).

No false statements here :)

SirMaster 12-18-2019 11:48 AM

I have not seen a LK952, but I have seen 3 LK970 in 3 different rooms and with their ~1000:1 contrast just look terrible and washed out grey in any sort of dark scene compared to even an Epson which has ~5000:1 contrast.

Mike Garrett 12-18-2019 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALRLIFE (Post 58974408)
Got the Benq LK952 today. I must say I am thoroughly impressed. I don't know how they did it, but I can't see any discernible drop off in black levels between it and the Epson 5050UB. Picture is bright and sharp on eco mode. Space scenes appear black and are not distracting. I watched scenes from Tron Legacy, Edge of Tomorrow, Star Trek Into the Darkness, and The Dark Knight rises. I much prefer this projector over the JVC X790R.

It looks superb when paired with my Dark Energy Pulsar screen. Now I wondering if I will get any discernible improvements in picture quality if I go with the LK 970? Any brighter, better contrast, etc? One drawback is the fans are loud in both eco and normal mode. I'm wondering if the LK 970's housing is any quieter? After five years of upgrading through multiple projectors from different technologies, this laster dlp is definitely my favorite thus far. Won't be able to rest until I know what the LK970 looks like when paired with a good alr screen!

Have you posted pictures of your room?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.