Epson 6050UB vs JVC NX5/NX7 - Page 13 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 165Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #361 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:11 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azekecse View Post
The Epson 5050/6050 is definitely a steal for the $. However if you have a bat cave and can afford it, the JVC NX7 has no substitute. I loved my 6040 but the NX7 with DTM is a whole different level.

Peace and blessings,

Azeke

Given how much of a difference the tone mapping makes, and how “easily” you can get great results with an off board processor like a lumagen or madvr, perhaps we’ve been looking at this wrong ...

Are we giving studios a pass for terrible mastering? Shouldn’t the burden be more on the studio side to make sure their content looks good on consumer displays?

Right now very few displays do it right, and among projectors you have a single choice with JVC... doesn’t that mean the content is the culprit?

If it only looks good on basically one brand of projectors , I’d say the content is at fault, but we give them a pass?!

It’s madness


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #362 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanhoek View Post
Given how much of a difference the tone mapping makes, and how “easily” you can get great results with an off board processor like a lumagen or madvr, perhaps we’ve been looking at this wrong ...

Are we giving studios a pass for terrible mastering? Shouldn’t the burden be more on the studio side to make sure their content looks good on consumer displays?

Right now very few displays do it right, and among projectors you have a single choice with JVC... doesn’t that mean the content is the culprit?

If it only looks good on basically one brand of projectors , I’d say the content is at fault, but we give them a pass?!

It’s madness


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No. The content is HDR and is thus mastered for 1000 or 4000 or sometimes 10000 nits.

Your projector can only do 50, to maybe 150 nits at best. Why is that the studio's problem that your display doesn't meet the video format's standard?
Mike Garrett likes this.
SirMaster is offline  
post #363 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:29 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
No. The content is HDR and is thus mastered for 1000 or 4000 or sometimes 10000 nits.

Your projector can only do 50, to maybe 150 nits at best. Why is that the studio's problem that your display doesn't meet the video format's standard?

It’s their problem because they’re trying to sell their movies to me and others with similar displays.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #364 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanhoek View Post
It’s their problem because they’re trying to sell their movies to me and others with similar displays.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't understand what you are proposing they do?

Make a special copy of the movies for projectors only? But are they to be made for people getting 50 nits on their projector screen, or 100 nits, or 150 nits?

They should release 3 copies of the movie? And then when you get a brighter projector in the future you need to get a new copy of the movie?

If you don't like the HDR copy then buy the SDR copy as they still make those and all projectors can pretty much handle the SDR format correctly. A projector is not a high dynamic range display. Where are they specifically marketing HDR movies to you for your projector?
SirMaster is offline  
post #365 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:36 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
I don't understand what you are proposing they do?

Make a special copy of the movies for projectors only? But are they to be made for people getting 50 nits on their projector screen, or 100 nits, or 150 nits?

They should release 3 copies of the movie? And then when you get a brighter projector in the future you need to get a new copy of the movie?

I’m not trying to dictate what they should do. However if their content looks terrible on the great majority of displays out there, I’d say they have a problem.

I’ve noticed Netflix and Amazon producing more UHD 4K content, sans HDR... perhaps the reason is it looks better for most people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
post #366 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanhoek View Post
I’m not trying to dictate what they should do. However if their content looks terrible on the great majority of displays out there, I’d say they have a problem.

I’ve noticed Netflix and Amazon producing more UHD 4K content, sans HDR... perhaps the reason is it looks better for most people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well then good because it doesn't. Their content looks great on the vast, vast majority of displays out there, TVs, and now PC monitors and even phones, (my phone does 1200 nits). Projectors make up a tiny almost insignificant percentage of consumer displays.

I have not seen any Amazon or Netflix content that has HDR that wasn't also available in SDR as well.


The 4K format comes with high dynamic range and obviously it makes the most sense for the display itself to display that HDR content correctly and as best that it can. How on earth could the content makers make their content look its best on projectors when there is no standard brightness for projectors.

Every TV of a certain model produces the exact same results. But your projector's results depend on the throw distance, the screen size, the screen gain, bulb age, etc.

Last edited by SirMaster; 03-23-2020 at 04:45 PM.
SirMaster is offline  
post #367 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:41 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
Well then good because it doesn't. Their content looks great on the vast, vast majority of displays out there, TVs, and now PC monitors and even phones, (my phone does 1200 nits). Projectors make up a tiny almost insignificant percentage of consumer displays.

I have not seen any Amazon or Netflix content that has HDR that wasn't also available in SDR as well.

You’re wrong. The great majority of consumers out there aren’t using high end HDR displays from 1-2 years ago.

Many are using TVs and devices that do poorly with HDR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
post #368 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanhoek View Post
You’re wrong. The great majority of consumers out there aren’t using high end HDR displays from 1-2 years ago.

Many are using TVs and devices that do poorly with HDR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I am not wrong. And on those displays the streaming services automatically select the non-HDR presentation. I have never seen a content on Amazon or Netflix that didn't have an SDR presentation to fall back on. If your display cannot play HDR correctly then stop selecting the HDR mode in the source.

But even for HDR there are an order of magnitude more HDR TVs in consumers homes compared to HDR projectors let alone any type of projector.
SirMaster is offline  
post #369 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:47 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
I am not wrong. And on those displays the streaming services automatically select the non-HDR presentation. I have never seen a content on Amazon or Netflix that didn't have an SDR presentation to fall back on.

But even for HDR there are an order of magnitude more HDR TVs in consumers homes compared to HDR projectors let alone any type of projector.

Nope the content isn’t automatically streamed in SDR. I wish that were true, but it isn’t. You have to manually configure your device to output SDR.

In some cases that gets you a 1080p stream, and in nearly all cases you can’t get expanded color gamut without HDR.

There are some limited devices that can take a 4K HDR stream or content and map it to 4K SDR properly, but that’s relatively rare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
post #370 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 04:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanhoek View Post
There are some limited devices that can take a 4K HDR stream or content and map it to 4K SDR properly, but that’s relatively rare.
And why shouldn't that be the display's job? If the display is including a HDR compatible input format, why isn't it the display's job to interpret and display that signal correctly? They chose to support it. Why are you saying that it should somehow be up to the content maker?


How on earth could a content maker make 1 copy that looks correct on a 4000 nit TV and a 100 nit projector? They already do this by making an HDR version for the 4000 nit display and a SDR version for the 100 nit display.


Clearly the whole fault here is the projector, for even allowing the HDR input format when it doesn't display it correctly. This is why JVC created Frame Adapt HDR, so that it does display the HDR format correctly.

There is nothing wrong with the HDR input format, it's the display's fault for not displaying it correctly. The video format follows a strict standard and the display is allowing the use of that format without meeting the standard for it.

Complain to your display maker for not displaying the formats they chose to support correctly.


If I buy a TV that only supports 70% of rec709 color space and my SDR video doesn't look colorful enough, somehow that's the content makes fault because they didn't make their content look right on my out of spec TV?
SirMaster is offline  
post #371 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 05:02 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
And why shouldn't that be the display's job? If the display is including a HDR compatible input format, why isn't it the display's job to interpret and display that signal correctly? They chose to support it. Why are you saying that it should somehow be up to the content maker?


How on earth could a content maker make 1 copy that looks correct on a 4000 nit TV and a 100 nit projector? They already do this by making an HDR version for the 4000 nit display and a SDR version for the 100 nit display.


Clearly the whole fault here is the projector, for even allowing the HDR input format when it doesn't display it correctly. This is why JVC created Frame Adapt HDR, so that it does display the HDR format correctly.

There is nothing wrong with the HDR input format, it's the display's fault for not displaying it correctly. The video format follows a strict standard and the display is allowing the use of that format without meeting the standard for it.

Complain to your display maker for not displaying the formats they chose to support correctly.


If I buy a TV that only supports 70% of rec709 color space and my SDR video doesn't look colorful enough, somehow that's the content makes fault because they didn't make their content look right on my out of spec TV?

You’re not seeing the issue... Regardless of fault, the reality that the content looks terrible more often than not still exists.

They can choose to ignore it and blame display makers all they want, while sales of their media slide and the losses pile up.

It’s similar to in the video game world, because game makers provide settings and make compromises to make their games work well in their target consumer systems... those that don’t, find their sales lagging as people have a terrible experience with their games.

I understand what you’re saying, in an ideal world, but this isn’t an ideal world, it’s the real world where product and production teams have to make compromises.

The mere fact they’re mastering to 4000 nits for some content when there aren’t any displays capable is insane. Even 1000 nits is relatively rare, don’t most high end OLEDs tap out below that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
post #372 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 05:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanhoek View Post
You’re not seeing the issue... Regardless of fault, the reality that the content looks terrible more often than not still exists.

They can choose to ignore it and blame display makers all they want, while sales of their media slide and the losses pile up.

It’s similar to in the video game world, because game makers provide settings and make compromises to make their games work well in their target consumer systems... those that don’t, find their sales lagging as people have a terrible experience with their games.

I understand what you’re saying, in an ideal world, but this isn’t an ideal world, it’s the real world where product and production teams have to make compromises.

The mere fact they’re mastering to 4000 nits for some content when there aren’t any displays capable is insane. Even 1000 nits is relatively rare, don’t most high end OLEDs tap out below that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Video games are not at all a similar comparison since they are rendered on the fly, they can have settings that can be adjusted to fit the environment. Video is all pre-rendered so you can't have 100 copies of the video for every possible display spec.

Sure TVs can be lower nit, but they all have internal tone-mapping that converts the input nits into the proper output nits. The reason they can do this so well is that every TV of that model performs the same. There are no variables like throw distance, screen size, screen gain and bulb age. Plus it's significantly easier to map 4000 into 700 than to map 4000 into 100 or less.

The content is made to high nit levels because displays are heading toward there. The studio is not going to re-master all their backlog again for super-HDR in a few years when 4000 nit TVs are more common.

The current level of HDR being created looks great on true HDR TVs even ones that only do 700 nits like OLEDs, and it will look even better on future brighter displays as well.

If you are not satisfied with HDR on your display and think that it looks worse than SDR, then I would just stick with the SDR version of the video for now until your display can display HDR better, because I promise you the HDR format is not going to change and content creators are not going to change how they are mastering their HDR to look better on lower nit native displays. Having multiple HDR formats would be a nightmare.
SirMaster is offline  
post #373 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 05:15 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
Video games are not at all a similar comparison since they are rendered on the fly, they can have settings that can be adjusted to fit the environment. Video is all pre-rendered so you can't have 100 copies of the video for every possible display spec.

Sure TVs can be lower nit, but they all have internal tone-mapping that converts the input nits into the proper output nits. The reason they can do this so well is that every TV of that model performs the same. There are no variables like throw distance, screen size, screen gain and bulb age. Plus it's significantly easier to map 4000 into 700 than to map 4000 into 100 or less.

The content is made to high nit levels because displays are heading toward there. The studio is not going to re-master all their backlog again for super-HDR in a few years when 4000 nit TVs are more common.

The current level of HDR being created looks great on true HDR TVs even ones that only do 700 nits like OLEDs, and it will look even better on future brighter displays as well.

If you are not satisfied with HDR on your display and think that it looks worse than SDR, then I would just stick with the SDR version of the video for now until your display can display HDR better, because I promise you the HDR format is not going to change and content creators are not going to change how they are mastering their HDR to look better on lower nit native displays. Having multiple HDR formats would be a nightmare.

Fair enough. Good luck to the industry.

I’m just letting you know that if too many consumers have a bad experience, they won’t care whose fault it is..

We’ll see how media sales figures trend.

Yes, if there is a 4K SDR alternative with WCG that is a good alternative, but often it’s 4K HDR and 1080p SDR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
post #374 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 05:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanhoek View Post
Fair enough. Good luck to the industry.

I’m just letting you know that if too many consumers have a bad experience, they won’t care whose fault it is..

We’ll see how media sales figures trend.

Yes, if there is a 4K SDR alternative with WCG that is a good alternative, but often it’s 4K HDR and 1080p SDR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The problem is wide color gamut SDR is not an industry standard format.

Unfortunately there is nothing the content creators can do to stop people from trying to play HDR on their TVs that do not properly support HDR. Only the display manufacturers and source media player devices can control that.
SirMaster is offline  
post #375 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 05:47 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,878
Mentioned: 279 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13494 Post(s)
Liked: 11128
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMaster View Post
Video games are not at all a similar comparison since they are rendered on the fly, they can have settings that can be adjusted to fit the environment. Video is all pre-rendered so you can't have 100 copies of the video for every possible display spec.

Sure TVs can be lower nit, but they all have internal tone-mapping that converts the input nits into the proper output nits. The reason they can do this so well is that every TV of that model performs the same. There are no variables like throw distance, screen size, screen gain and bulb age. Plus it's significantly easier to map 4000 into 700 than to map 4000 into 100 or less.

The content is made to high nit levels because displays are heading toward there. The studio is not going to re-master all their backlog again for super-HDR in a few years when 4000 nit TVs are more common.

The current level of HDR being created looks great on true HDR TVs even ones that only do 700 nits like OLEDs, and it will look even better on future brighter displays as well.

If you are not satisfied with HDR on your display and think that it looks worse than SDR, then I would just stick with the SDR version of the video for now until your display can display HDR better, because I promise you the HDR format is not going to change and content creators are not going to change how they are mastering their HDR to look better on lower nit native displays. Having multiple HDR formats would be a nightmare.
I agree that displays are heading toward higher nits, but even some of the people that help set the standards, do not seem to understand. HDR format is high dynamic range, not high brightness. This is why JVC's with lower brightness but higher contrast look better than higher brightness, lower contrast projectors, even if the JVC is 20FL and the low contrast projector is 28 to 30FL. So while we do need higher brightness, we also need higher contrast.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #376 of 403 Old 03-23-2020, 05:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
I agree that displays are heading toward higher nits, but even some of the people that help set the standards, do not seem to understand. HDR format is high dynamic range, not high brightness. This is why JVC's with lower brightness but higher contrast look better than higher brightness, lower contrast projectors, even if the JVC is 20FL and the low contrast projector is 28 to 30FL. So while we do need higher brightness, we also need higher contrast.
Yeah, in reality you need both to truly do HDR, but if you can only have 1 then higher contrast is far more important since between any 2 projectors, the brightness different probably wont be that much different. Certainly not 2x or 4x or even greater difference like the contrast spec is on a JVC vs. most competitors.
Mike Garrett likes this.
SirMaster is offline  
post #377 of 403 Old 03-28-2020, 09:02 PM
Member
 
blkz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 20
I'm about 2 months out from starting to set up my home theater room in my new house I built.

I originally had a RS400 for about 18 months, and when I sold my old house the buyer made me a great offer to leave everything there. Honestly, I liked the RS400, but I can't say it blew me away. I had several problems with it, one being a slight bow in the bottom of the picture which could be seen very distinctly in the green set up lines during the initial set up. JVC tech walked me thru several steps to try to fix it, but mostly blamed my initial setup on the bow. Needless to say, it wasn't me. The picture was still beautiful though, but I'm OCD and could really never get the picture exactly the way I felt it needed to be for the money spent.

Nonetheless, I am still interested in a new JVC, but not sure which one to look at. I'm about 50/50 movies and sports and I prefer sharpness and contrast over anything else. I'll be running a 120" screen, total dedicated HT room, and my seating distance will be around 12 feet.

I'm guessing the 1000 might be the ticket?

Last edited by blkz06; 03-28-2020 at 09:05 PM.
blkz06 is offline  
post #378 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 06:06 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,878
Mentioned: 279 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13494 Post(s)
Liked: 11128
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
I'm about 2 months out from starting to set up my home theater room in my new house I built.

I originally had a RS400 for about 18 months, and when I sold my old house the buyer made me a great offer to leave everything there. Honestly, I liked the RS400, but I can't say it blew me away. I had several problems with it, one being a slight bow in the bottom of the picture which could be seen very distinctly in the green set up lines during the initial set up. JVC tech walked me thru several steps to try to fix it, but mostly blamed my initial setup on the bow. Needless to say, it wasn't me. The picture was still beautiful though, but I'm OCD and could really never get the picture exactly the way I felt it needed to be for the money spent.

Nonetheless, I am still interested in a new JVC, but not sure which one to look at. I'm about 50/50 movies and sports and I prefer sharpness and contrast over anything else. I'll be running a 120" screen, total dedicated HT room, and my seating distance will be around 12 feet.

I'm guessing the 1000 might be the ticket?
You did not list budget? For your setup the RS2000 would be my first choice, with RS1000 2nd. When you say bow in the image, did the bottom line (going from left to right) curve up and then curve down? Or are you talking about the bottom line angling up only or angling down only?

If the line is curving, then it is either the projector or the screen. If the line is angling, then it is either the screen or setup. If the screen is perfectly flat in plane, then if curving, it is the projector and if angling, it is the setup.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #379 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 06:43 AM
Member
 
blkz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
You did not list budget? For your setup the RS2000 would be my first choice, with RS1000 2nd. When you say bow in the image, did the bottom line (going from left to right) curve up and then curve down? Or are you talking about the bottom line angling up only or angling down only?

If the line is curving, then it is either the projector or the screen. If the line is angling, then it is either the screen or setup. If the screen is perfectly flat in plane, then if curving, it is the projector and if angling, it is the setup.
Sorry about that. Projector wise, I'm probably not going to go over 6 grand. I probably won't spend enough time watching movies or sports
in the HT room to warrant spending more than that, because I have a huge Lanai outside with motorized screens that can drop down and that area has a 75" TV, bar, and fireplace too. Its capable of year round use.

Anyways...the RS2000 looks to be more than I want to spend. With the lack of 4K programming, I'm wondering if I should look at the RS540 (if its even available anymore) or roll the dice on the 1000?

As far as the original RS400...the bow was in the bottom of the picture. Tops and sides were perfectly parallel, bottom center bowed upwards.

JVC told me it was my screen. Checked with laser levels, checked with 10' manual levels. Perfect. Then JVC said projector was off center. Checked with laser, checked manually with digital tape measures. Perfect. Then they said my ceiling was not level. Um, ok.
I build million dollar homes, and have thousands of dollars in layout tools. It wasn't the setup. But JVC had a problem understanding that. Its fine, its in the past...but I am a bit gun-shy because of the lack of tech support I received from them. Its almost like they think their product is incapable of having issues.

But, I still thought the picture looked great, especially with sports.

Last edited by blkz06; 03-29-2020 at 06:47 AM.
blkz06 is offline  
post #380 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 06:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Luminated67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,372
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 898 Post(s)
Liked: 494
^Bet you were using a fixed frame screen because I had the same problem with my screen and it end up my walls was ever so slightly off plumb and a couple of washers at the bottom right corner sorted it out. No amount of adjustment on the mount could ever cure this.
pdoherty972 likes this.

Epson EH-TW9400 - QualGear Fixed Frame 100” - Sony x700 BRP & Panasonic 420 BRP - Sony 1080 AVR - IPL Acoustics M1TLs & IPL Acoustics AVC Pro Centre, Four KEF surrounds & 2 Sub boxes (10” Sub + 10” Passive Radiator)
Luminated67 is online now  
post #381 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 07:02 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,878
Mentioned: 279 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13494 Post(s)
Liked: 11128
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
Sorry about that. Projector wise, I'm probably not going to go over 6 grand. I probably won't spend enough time watching movies or sports
in the HT room to warrant spending more than that, because I have a huge Lanai outside with motorized screens that can drop down and that area has a 75" TV, bar, and fireplace too. Its capable of year round use.

Anyways...the RS2000 looks to be more than I want to spend. With the lack of 4K programming, I'm wondering if I should look at the RS540 (if its even available anymore) or roll the dice on the 1000?

As far as the original RS400...the bow was in the bottom of the picture. Tops and sides were perfectly parallel, bottom center bowed upwards.

JVC told me it was my screen. Checked with laser levels, checked with 10' manual levels. Perfect. Then JVC said projector was off center. Checked with laser, checked manually with digital tape measures. Perfect. Then they said my ceiling was not level. Um, ok.
I build million dollar homes, and have thousands of dollars in layout tools. It wasn't the setup. But JVC had a problem understanding that. Its fine, its in the past...but I am a bit gun-shy because of the lack of tech support I received from them. Its almost like they think their product is incapable of having issues.

But, I still thought the picture looked great, especially with sports.
It sounds like you just were not accepting JVC's statement. You can have three straight with the frame and the fourth side off and yes indeed that can be setup. You keep saying bowed. Was line curved or angled? If angled, like I suspect, then JVC was probably correct in telling you that it was a setup issue.

Last edited by Mike Garrett; 03-29-2020 at 07:30 AM.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #382 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 07:36 AM
Member
 
blkz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
Sorry about that. Projector wise, I'm probably not going to go over 6 grand. I probably won't spend enough time watching movies or sports
in the HT room to warrant spending more than that, because I have a huge Lanai outside with motorized screens that can drop down and that area has a 75" TV, bar, and fireplace too. Its capable of year round use.

Anyways...the RS2000 looks to be more than I want to spend. With the lack of 4K programming, I'm wondering if I should look at the RS540 (if its even available anymore) or roll the dice on the 1000?

As far as the original RS400...the bow was in the bottom of the picture. Tops and sides were perfectly parallel, bottom center bowed upwards.

JVC told me it was my screen. Checked with laser levels, checked with 10' manual levels. Perfect. Then JVC said projector was off center. Checked with laser, checked manually with digital tape measures. Perfect. Then they said my ceiling was not level. Um, ok.
I build million dollar homes, and have thousands of dollars in layout tools. It wasn't the setup. But JVC had a problem understanding that. Its fine, its in the past...but I am a bit gun-shy because of the lack of tech support I received from them. Its almost like they think their product is incapable of having issues.

But, I still thought the picture looked great, especially with sports.
It sounds like you just were not accepting JVC's statement. You can have three straight with the frame and the fourth side off and yes indeed that is setup. You keep saying bowed. Was line curved or angled? If angled, like I suspect, then JVC was 100% correct in telling you that it was a setup issue. This is not based on opinion. This is based on the mathematics of a projected image.
Thanks Mike.

I accept explanations when they make sense.

The setup line was not angled. It was Bowed. Bowed upwards in the center bottom green grid line. Curved I guess would be another way of saying it.

Regardless, lasers don’t lie and neither do 10’ precision levels.

If the screen was 100% plumb and level at all 4 sides and corners and there is no bowing in the frame then isn’t the screen out of the equation?

A 3 plane laser accurate to 1/16” at 100 feet was used to square the projector to the wall and the screen. If it’s square, that then removed the other argument JVC kept making.

Outside of that, as I said that ship has sailed and I’m in the market for another projector, preferably JVC even after the dilemma I had with the RS400.
blkz06 is offline  
post #383 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 08:00 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,878
Mentioned: 279 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13494 Post(s)
Liked: 11128
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
Thanks Mike.

I accept explanations when they make sense.

The setup line was not angled. It was Bowed. Bowed upwards in the center bottom green grid line. Curved I guess would be another way of saying it.

Regardless, lasers don’t lie and neither do 10’ precision levels.

If the screen was 100% plumb and level at all 4 sides and corners and there is no bowing in the frame then isn’t the screen out of the equation?

A 3 plane laser accurate to 1/16” at 100 feet was used to square the projector to the wall and the screen. If it’s square, that then removed the other argument JVC kept making.

Outside of that, as I said that ship has sailed and I’m in the market for another projector, preferably JVC even after the dilemma I had with the RS400.
If curved, then it has to be projector or screen, but most likely projector. Were you close to short end of the throw? That is worst case for bowing. The new line has less issue with this.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #384 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 08:08 AM
Member
 
blkz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
Thanks Mike.

I accept explanations when they make sense.

The setup line was not angled. It was Bowed. Bowed upwards in the center bottom green grid line. Curved I guess would be another way of saying it.

Regardless, lasers don’️t lie and neither do 10’️ precision levels.

If the screen was 100% plumb and level at all 4 sides and corners and there is no bowing in the frame then isn’️t the screen out of the equation?

A 3 plane laser accurate to 1/16” at 100 feet was used to square the projector to the wall and the screen. If it’️s square, that then removed the other argument JVC kept making.

Outside of that, as I said that ship has sailed and I’️m in the market for another projector, preferably JVC even after the dilemma I had with the RS400.
If curved, then it has to be projector or screen, but most likely projector. Were you close to short end of the throw? That is worst case for bowing. The new line has less issue with this. [IMG class=inlineimg]/forum/images/smilies/smile.gif[/IMG]
I believe I was at 17’ for the projector distance. I’m glad to hear the new line has less issue.

So what are the pros/cons of the 540 vs the 1000? The 540 has better contrast correct? The 1000 has better sharpness? Would the 1000’s contrast be in line with my old RS400 all things being equal? I really didn’t have an issue in general with the RS400 picture. It was very black, and sharpness was good.

Since this is a Epson thread too, outside of the screen door effect how does the Epson rank with the JVC?
blkz06 is offline  
post #385 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 09:04 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,878
Mentioned: 279 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13494 Post(s)
Liked: 11128
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
I believe I was at 17’ for the projector distance. I’m glad to hear the new line has less issue.

So what are the pros/cons of the 540 vs the 1000? The 540 has better contrast correct? The 1000 has better sharpness? Would the 1000’s contrast be in line with my old RS400 all things being equal? I really didn’t have an issue in general with the RS400 picture. It was very black, and sharpness was good.

Since this is a Epson thread too, outside of the screen door effect how does the Epson rank with the JVC?
Yes, 540 has more contrast, but at fully open iris, where you probably will be close to if not there for HDR, the contrast difference is much smaller. Still an advantage for the 540, but much smaller. If you were only looking at SDR, the 540 would be a great option, but for HDR the 1000 has several advantages.

1000
Sharper due to improved lens
Cleaner image
Much better HDR tone mapping
Can tone map any source
More accurate lens memory
Ability to use DCR lens gaining brightness
Installation memory

540
Contrast (40,000:1 vs 20,000:1 open and 130,000;1 vs 40,000:1 fully closed)
Price
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #386 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 09:05 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SirMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,276
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1056 Post(s)
Liked: 694
My NX5 curves in on the top and the bottom like a pincushion.

However I am operating at the closest possible throw with a 140” picture.

The middle of my screen measured vertically is about 1/2 inch less than both of the side edges measured vertically.

So the top and bottom edge both curve in by about 1/4 inch in the center.

Hardly a problem as the spillover is easily absorbed by my black velvet frame.
SirMaster is offline  
post #387 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 09:08 AM
Member
 
blkz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Garrett View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
I believe I was at 17’️ for the projector distance. I’️m glad to hear the new line has less issue.

So what are the pros/cons of the 540 vs the 1000? The 540 has better contrast correct? The 1000 has better sharpness? Would the 1000’️s contrast be in line with my old RS400 all things being equal? I really didn’️t have an issue in general with the RS400 picture. It was very black, and sharpness was good.

Since this is a Epson thread too, outside of the screen door effect how does the Epson rank with the JVC?
Yes, 540 has more contrast, but at fully open iris, where you probably will be close to if not there for HDR, the contrast difference is much smaller. Still an advantage for the 540, but much smaller. If you were only looking at SDR, the 540 would be a great option, but for HDR the 1000 has several advantages.

1000
Sharper due to improved lens
Cleaner image
Much better HDR tone mapping
Can tone map any source
More accurate lens memory
Ability to use DCR lens gaining brightness
Installation memory
I’ll call you sometime in the next couple weeks or if you have time I’d like to get a price via PM on the 1000. I’m still a couple months out but I’d like to start getting my pricing together. Thank you!
blkz06 is offline  
post #388 of 403 Old 03-29-2020, 09:13 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Mike Garrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 27,878
Mentioned: 279 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13494 Post(s)
Liked: 11128
Send a message via Skype™ to Mike Garrett
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkz06 View Post
I’ll call you sometime in the next couple weeks or if you have time I’d like to get a price via PM on the 1000. I’m still a couple months out but I’d like to start getting my pricing together. Thank you!
I do not use the PM system. Be happy to help you.
Mike Garrett is offline  
post #389 of 403 Old 04-01-2020, 06:04 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
plain fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Denver area
Posts: 1,604
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Given how much of a difference the tone mapping makes, and how “easily” you can get great results with an off board processor like a lumagen or madvr, perhaps we’ve been looking at this wrong ...
I was just thinking about this as well but from a different perspective. With regard to Dynamic Tone Mapping only, would it make more sense to go with a projector like the Epson 5050 and an external processor like the Lumagen or MadVR to perform better scaling and DTM than what the manufacturers are doing?

Grady
<<plain fan>>
plain fan is offline  
post #390 of 403 Old 04-01-2020, 06:05 PM
Senior Member
 
ivanhoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Epson 6050UB vs JVC NX5/NX7

Quote:
Originally Posted by plain fan View Post
I was just thinking about this as well but from a different perspective. With regard to Dynamic Tone Mapping only, would it make more sense to go with a projector like the Epson 5050 and an external processor like the Lumagen or MadVR to perform better scaling and DTM than what the manufacturers are doing?

Id say no because the interconnects are also moving targets... so your off board processor probably won’t carry you through a projector upgrade or two, like we had during the 1080p era


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ivanhoek is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Digital Hi-End Projectors - $3,000+ USD MSRP

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


Forum Jump: 

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

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