Originally Posted by Ken Ross
That’s possible I’m sure, but I’d like to hear it anyway.
Here’s another question. The white points were altered on the displays to match the ‘reference monitor’ whose white point is different. Keep in mind this was the first time this had been done in these shootouts. If a consumer display is designed to display a particular white point, and that white point is altered beyond what the manufacturer had designed for, could that not impact the resulting accuracy? Since this is the first time this was done, I don’t think it’s an offbeat question to ask.
Then, we look at another review where the white point was not changed (rtings), and they come with different findings. So there we have at least two variables, the first being they stuck with the C9’s originally intended white point and two, a different calibrator did the work.
I’m not impugning the work of anyone, but these are legitimate variables that can impact the outcomes.
>>The white points were altered on the displays to match the ‘reference monitor’ whose white point is different. Keep in mind this was the first time this had been done in these shootouts?
No it was also done at the last TV Shootout and Vincent Teoh uses the technique as you can see in one of his latest video reviews of C9 vs the Q90R.
>>If a consumer display is designed to display a particular white point, and that white point is altered beyond what the manufacturer had designed for, could that not impact the resulting accuracy?
True but the perceptual match white point is only a small movement from D65. It's not any more deviation from D65 than you would have using an alternate white point that some well known experienced professional calibrator's sometimes recommend.
As far as the calibration of the BVM-x300, it's a $30,000 monitor and has an extremely accurate calibration. It was calibrated from Sony, which we verified was set to the modified Judd white point because it uses a RGB OLED panel. Even in the unlikely possibility that it was slightly off, every set was perceptually matched to that reference so it wouldn't make any difference.
Once the perceptual match is done and the set is calibrated to it's matched white point, then the TVs capability to display colors, etc, is on a level playing field and can be done properly.
As far as calibration, we used two sets of reference equipment to verify accuracy.
At the last TV Shootout, Tyler Pruitt, Dave Abrams and my self did the match and this year Kevin Miller and I did the match so as you can see well known, respected professional calibrators with years of experience were involved both times and of course Vincent Teoh uses the same technique when comparing TVs with different panel technologies. I hope this explanation on how things were done demonstrates the attention to detail and accuracy so all the sets were on a level playing field for comparison.
One last thing that needs to be mentioned, just because a TV is calibrated and the scans look good with very low errors doesn't mean that every color it tries to reproduce or all content is decoded correctly which is why in this TV Shootout, many of the test patterns and content looked identical on both OLEDs but in some cases it did not. So just because the LGC9 had slightly more accurate CalMAN scans meaning less errors in some areas doesn't mean it's going to reproduce everything 100% accurately. Also most of the better accuracy shown in the scans is way below what the human eye can perceive anyway.