Christie Eclipse Projector - Page 16 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 832Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 858 Old 11-08-2018, 11:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
EvLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
Well, there are 2 different ways to do dynamic tone mapping without HDR10+ and DV:

1) You can measure the frames as you go, and adjust the tone mapping based on that. This is what both madVR and Lumagen will be trying to do, as good as possible. But because this kind of approach can't look into the future, we can be surprised by the video suddenly and unexpectedly getting much brighter or much darker. This is problematic because if you adjust too quickly, you can get image pumping artifacts, but if you adjust too slowly, highlight detail might be clipped for a few frames or seconds. So it's not ideal, but it should still work reasonably well. Of course much depends on how well the algorithm is written and tuned/optimized.

2) The latest madVR build allows you to pre-process a full movie and store all important measurements to a file. This way madVR knows in advance the measurements of all past and future frames. This way there's no surprise waiting, but we can calculate the ideal tone mapping curves for the whole movie right at playback start, without clipping any highlight details. I *hope* that this solution will not produce any artifacts, but provide a near perfect experience.

I don't know yet how HDR10+ will be implemented by the studios. They could in theory provide metadata for each individual frame. Or they could provide metadata for each micro-scene (e.g. a camera perspective changing already qualifies as a micro-scene change). If they provide metadata for each individual frame, the question is how quickly you can adjust the tone mapping curve for each frame, without introducing flickering and image pumping artifacts. Because of that I suspect (but don't know for sure) that they're rather going to provide metadata per scene, not per frame. If they do that, the tone mapping curve is going to stay static for each micro-scene, but can potentially change completely at each scene-cut.

If they do provide per-scene metadata (and not per-frame metadata), there should be no flickering/pumping artifacts. *BUT*, sometimes there are long scenes without any cuts, where the brightness can still change quite noticeably within the scene. In this situation using per-scene metadata might still lose some dynamicity (is that a word?). FWIW, madVR's approach 2) still applies some dynamic adjustments even within each scene, to give you the best possible quality. But this is done very carefuly, as to not introduce any flickering or pumping artifacts. So if HDR10+ uses per-scene metadata, madVR *may* already be able to beat that right now, without needing HDR10+ movies, players, AVRs or displays.
Dynamic metadata is typically generated as part of a process that also contains the edit list for the movie, either in the color correction system itself or during final encoding with a system like Transkoder. That lends it to being scene-based except in special circumstances like dissolves where it may switch to being per-frame. This is where the operator comes into play, deciding if the automatically generated metadata could benefit from manual adjustment after reviewing the results.

Last edited by EvLee; 11-08-2018 at 11:48 PM.
EvLee is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 858 Old 11-08-2018, 11:53 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvLee View Post
No, Kris is correct. The DV algorithm was developed primarily for display mapping in a fixed viewing environment, not for going between different environments. It was always presented as a solution for enabling color managed HDR in the home market. It was never really expected to be used for theatrical presentation, even though it had been part of the high level sales pitch they would give to execs. The standard cinema post-production workflow even to this day is that theatrical gets graded before home releases, so DV simply is not an option to derive a cinema version from a higher nit monitor grade because the home HDR grade is that last thing that gets completed, after the movie is already in theaters many times! Maybe once there is a high-luminance, large screen display that meets mastering quality requirements this will change, but not until then. Dolby Cinema is not Dolby Vision.
Yes and no

I think it is important to differentiate between consumer Dolby Vision and commercial cinema (DCP)) Dolby Vision.

Dolby Cinema most certainly IS Dolby Vision. But it is not consumer Dolby Vision.

And according to DOLBY themselves what I reported in my previous post is correct.

Where just one example of many, from the DOLBY CINEMA website: Dolby Cinema: The Total Cinema Experience

"Dolby Vision™ HDR was designed for the cinema to deliver incredible color, a million-to-one contrast ratio, and twice the brightness of standard screens. Powered by dual-laser projection technology and engineered for a consistent experience, Dolby Vision lets you see more of the story."

Sure sounds like Dolby Cinema is Dolby Vision to me!

And the commercial iteration was first to market, meaning that the first official DOLBY VISION display device was indeed the DOLBY CINEMA DOLBY VISION projector


Last edited by ARROW-AV; 11-09-2018 at 12:00 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #453 of 858 Old 11-09-2018, 12:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
EvLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Yes and no

I think it is important to differentiate between consumer Dolby Vision and commercial cinema (DCP)) Dolby Vision.

Dolby Cinema most certainly IS Dolby Vision. But it is not consumer Dolby Vision.

And according to DOLBY themselves what I reported in my previous post is correct.

Where just one example of many, from the DOLBY CINEMA website https://www.dolby.com/us/en/platforms/dolby-cinema.html:

"Dolby Vision™ HDR was designed for the cinema to deliver incredible color, a million-to-one contrast ratio, and twice the brightness of standard screens. Powered by dual-laser projection technology and engineered for a consistent experience, Dolby Vision lets you see more of the story."

Sure sounds like Dolby Cinema is Dolby Vision to me!

And the commercial iteration was first to market, meaning that the first official DOLBY VISION display device was indeed the DOLBY CINEMA DOLBY VISION projector

Take a Ford Focus and take a Ford GT. They are both "Fords" but hardly the same thing.

Sure. The "Dolby Vision" brand is shared across home and cinema applications, but cinema hardly uses any of the technology that is associated with Dolby Vision processing for home (except for the EOTF). It doesn't go through the same workflow at all. Dolby Vision metadata for cinema literally consists of a single flag in the DCP that tells the projector to switch into HDR mode. The cinema system was born from work that was all done initially for home, then significantly simplified for that specific closed environment. And why was it first to market? Well, the time need for standards to get approved by multiple national bodies and put out an infrastructure for home meant the theatrical system was unveiled to the public first even though the home version was already completed long before. It just takes a while to slog through redtape, politics and people nitpicking over the exact definition of things like "color volume". Look, you can interpret what you want from what their sales team puts out, or you can believe an engineer who actually... well, I shouldn't say any more, except I think it is a bad practice to let people believe the Dolby Vision experience at home is actually as closely coupled to the cinema Dolby Vision version to the extent they think. It's not, and you're never going to get an equivalent to the Dolby Vision cinema grade through any use of the home Dolby Vision metadata.
EvLee is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #454 of 858 Old 11-09-2018, 12:37 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvLee View Post
Take a Ford Focus and take a Ford GT. They are both "Fords" but hardly the same thing.
So what? That's not even remotely the situation here.

In short, they are not both called Ford Focus are they?

Whereas BOTH instances here are called DOLBY VISION... Not DOLBY VISION and DOLBY SOMETHINGELSE

Quote:
Originally Posted by EvLee View Post
Sure. The "Dolby Vision" brand is shared across home and cinema applications, but cinema hardly uses any of the technology that is associated with Dolby Vision processing for home (except for the EOTF). It doesn't go through the same workflow at all. Dolby Vision metadata for cinema literally consists of a single flag in the DCP that tells the projector to switch into HDR mode. The cinema system was born from work that was all done initially for home, then significantly simplified for that specific closed environment. And why was it first to market? Well, the time need for standards to get approved by multiple national bodies and put out an infrastructure for home meant the theatrical system was unveiled to the public first even though the home version was already completed long before. It just takes a while to slog through redtape, politics and people nitpicking over the exact definition of things like "color volume". Look, you can interpret what you want from what their sales team puts out, or you can believe an engineer who actually... well, I shouldn't say any more, except I think it is a bad practice to let people believe the Dolby Vision experience at home is actually as closely coupled to the cinema Dolby Vision version to the extent they think. It's not, and you're never going to get an equivalent to the Dolby Vision cinema grade through any use of the home Dolby Vision metadata.
You do realize that I was the one to first point out that the consumer and commerical versions of DOLBY VISION are completely different right? AND I have repeated this numerous times throughout this thread

Sorry, but you were/are factually incorrect in stating that "Dolby Cinema is not Dolby Vision" because it bloody well is. AND it was the first version to market. Quite simply that is an erroneous statement. What you mean is "Dolby Cinema is not CONSUMER Dolby Vision" regarding which not only I agree, but I was the first person to state this in this thread.

Yes, the consumer version is different but they are both called DOLBY VISION and the first iteration was developed by DOLBY for use exclusively within DOLBY CINEMAS, and this was first to market.

Therefore, I was and am absolutely 100% factually correct in stating that the first iteration / instance of DOLBY VISION was with respect to projectors/projection

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #455 of 858 Old 11-09-2018, 01:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
EvLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 397 Post(s)
Liked: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
So what? That's not even remotely the situation here.

In short, they are not both called Ford Focus are they?

Whereas BOTH instances here are called DOLBY VISION... Not DOLBY VISION and DOLBY SOMETHINGELSE


You do realize that I was the one to first point out that the consumer and commerical versions of DOLBY VISION are completely different right? AND I have repeated this numerous times throughout this thread

Sorry, but you were/are factually incorrect in stating that "Dolby Cinema is not Dolby Vision" because it bloody well is. AND it was the first version to market. Quite simply that is an erroneous statement. What you mean is "Dolby Cinema is not CONSUMER Dolby Vision" regarding which not only I agree, but I was the first person to state this in this thread.

Yes, the consumer version is different but they are both called DOLBY VISION and the first iteration was developed by DOLBY for use exclusively within DOLBY CINEMAS, and this was first to market.

Therefore, I was and am absolutely 100% factually correct in stating that the first iteration / instance of DOLBY VISION was with respect to projectors/projection

Okay. Let's back up here a bit. The name Dolby Vision before it was even known to the market was already being used in white papers to describe the fully fleshed out home system long before any work on projection had begun. That system was split apart into separate components that were standardized in parts. SMPTE 2084 was the first part to get standardized. That's the PQ EOTF. This was adopted for use in digital cinema projectors, but not developed exclusively for that application and certainly was not the first iteration. In fact, the viewing conditions that the PQ EOTF was optimized for actually correspond to (since is based on the Barten model) studio monitor viewing conditions, not theatrical. Whether DOLBY VISION TM (emphasis on the trademark, emphasis on ALL CAPS) was first used with projection I am not going to argue because it really is just a name and branding exercise. If you want to say Dolby Cinema projection was the first trademarked usage of the term in the market, go right ahead, but the Dolby Vision system in its full feature set was being used by studios even before that. That is the first iteration, and projection was left out of it on purpose.

Last edited by EvLee; 11-09-2018 at 01:09 AM.
EvLee is offline  
post #456 of 858 Old 11-09-2018, 01:46 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvLee View Post
Okay. Let's back up here a bit. The name Dolby Vision before it was even known to the market was already being used in white papers to describe the fully fleshed out home system long before any work on projection had begun. That system was split apart into separate components that were standardized in parts. SMPTE 2084 was the first part to get standardized. That's the PQ EOTF. This was adopted for use in digital cinema projectors, but not developed exclusively for that application and certainly was not the first iteration. In fact, the viewing conditions that the PQ EOTF was optimized for actually correspond to (since is based on the Barten model) studio monitor viewing conditions, not theatrical. Whether DOLBY VISION TM (emphasis on the trademark, emphasis on ALL CAPS) was first used with projection I am not going to argue because it really is just a name and branding exercise. If you want to say Dolby Cinema projection was the first trademarked usage of the term in the market, go right ahead, but the Dolby Vision system in its full feature set was being used by studios even before that. That is the first iteration, and projection was left out of it on purpose.
Was it actually called DOLBY VISION?

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #457 of 858 Old 11-09-2018, 05:06 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,853
Mentioned: 574 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked: 3872
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvLee View Post
Dynamic metadata is typically generated as part of a process that also contains the edit list for the movie, either in the color correction system itself or during final encoding with a system like Transkoder. That lends it to being scene-based except in special circumstances like dissolves where it may switch to being per-frame. This is where the operator comes into play, deciding if the automatically generated metadata could benefit from manual adjustment after reviewing the results.
That's good to know, thanks!
Archibald1 likes this.
madshi is offline  
post #458 of 858 Old 11-09-2018, 09:28 AM
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 868
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
That's good to know, thanks!
For MadVR, it seems like it would be necessary only to pre-process only a few frames in advance, to detect scene changes (where neighbouring frames are suddenly too different). That seems like it should be do-able in real-time, given that we also have frame interpolation happening in real-time and that requires more than 1 frame.
BattleAxeVR is offline  
post #459 of 858 Old 11-09-2018, 09:43 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,853
Mentioned: 574 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked: 3872
Quote:
Originally Posted by BattleAxeVR View Post
For MadVR, it seems like it would be necessary only to pre-process only a few frames in advance, to detect scene changes (where neighbouring frames are suddenly too different). That seems like it should be do-able in real-time, given that we also have frame interpolation happening in real-time and that requires more than 1 frame.
Scene change detection is already working well right now. But what happens if brightness changes unexpectedly *within* a scene? That's the biggest problem. But anyway, I guess that's a bit out of topic here.
bobof likes this.
madshi is offline  
post #460 of 858 Old 11-10-2018, 03:19 AM
aka jfinnie
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Norwich, UK
Posts: 3,392
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2724 Post(s)
Liked: 1872
Quote:
Originally Posted by madshi View Post
That's good to know, thanks!
I guess those IMAX enhanced titles with HDR10+ should be becoming available in the market soon. I wonder what kind of job they've done on the dynamic metadata for them.

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk
bobof is online now  
post #461 of 858 Old 11-10-2018, 03:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
madshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,853
Mentioned: 574 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2749 Post(s)
Liked: 3872
Once those are available, we can have a look...
bobof likes this.
madshi is offline  
post #462 of 858 Old 11-26-2018, 01:16 PM
Member
 
ailil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Very soon

Any updates on that projector's review? I have been following it since you mentioned it in another thread, and really looking forward to read about it and the technology that allows it to achieve such performance.
ailil is offline  
post #463 of 858 Old 11-26-2018, 02:26 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 24,273
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1297 Post(s)
Liked: 1730
Quote:
Originally Posted by ailil View Post
Any updates on that projector's review? I have been following it since you mentioned it in another thread, and really looking forward to read about it and the technology that allows it to achieve such performance.

I thought that his review was fairly comprehensive in this thread.
Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #464 of 858 Old 11-26-2018, 02:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 948
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 587 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
I thought that his review was fairly comprehensive in this thread.

Different projector, different technology, amazing results for a projector that can be easily accommodated in most HT designs.
ailil likes this.
Lasalle is offline  
post #465 of 858 Old 11-26-2018, 03:15 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 24,273
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1297 Post(s)
Liked: 1730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
Different projector, different technology, amazing results for a projector that can be easily accommodated in most HT designs.

So he wasn't referring to the Christie Large Venue demo projector ?
Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #466 of 858 Old 11-26-2018, 03:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 948
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 587 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
So he wasn't referring to the Christie Large Venue demo projector ?

No Art, he was referring to this one:


https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...l#post56476032
ailil likes this.
Lasalle is offline  
post #467 of 858 Old 11-26-2018, 03:27 PM
Member
 
ailil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
So he wasn't referring to the Christie Large Venue demo projector ?
No, i was referring to a projector Arrow started talking about quite some time ago in a thread titled "When is the next line of 4k projectors coming". He couldn't reveal details due to a NDA but said he would be writing a review about it. He mentioned something about 107% coverage of P3, 1000 ANSI contrast, 30000:1 native and 7000 or 9000 ANSI Lumens if i remember correctly. I think it was also mentioned at some point that it was a DLP projector but with a very different technology than the Christie one. I'm sure many forum members are eager to read the review!
Lasalle, gwthacker and trammer like this.
ailil is offline  
post #468 of 858 Old 11-26-2018, 03:29 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 24,273
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1297 Post(s)
Liked: 1730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
No Art, he was referring to this one:


https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...l#post56476032

Thanks.
Lasalle likes this.
Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #469 of 858 Old 11-27-2018, 12:04 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by ailil View Post
Any updates on that projector's review? I have been following it since you mentioned it in another thread, and really looking forward to read about it and the technology that allows it to achieve such performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
I thought that his review was fairly comprehensive in this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
Different projector, different technology, amazing results for a projector that can be easily accommodated in most HT designs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
So he wasn't referring to the Christie Large Venue demo projector ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ailil View Post
No, i was referring to a projector Arrow started talking about quite some time ago in a thread titled "When is the next line of 4k projectors coming". He couldn't reveal details due to a NDA but said he would be writing a review about it. He mentioned something about 107% coverage of P3, 1000 ANSI contrast, 30000:1 native and 7000 or 9000 ANSI Lumens if i remember correctly. I think it was also mentioned at some point that it was a DLP projector but with a very different technology than the Christie one. I'm sure many forum members are eager to read the review!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
No Art, he was referring to this one:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...l#post56476032
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Sonneborn View Post
Thanks.
In short, I consider that this new Christie projector is the new benchmark against which all other projectors will now need to be compared. So I am going to spend one more session with this other projector such that my review does precisely this. Also, I need to take some further measurements that I believe will help explain why the perceived performance is as good as it is

Also it is worth bearing in mind that the MSRP is 130K - 150K... and there are a couple of aspects that might be an issue for some (but not all) people

I would have completed this a while ago but unfortunately I had a personal matter that needed attending to, and this is the main cause for the delay.

ailil, Mike Garrett and trammer like this.

Last edited by ARROW-AV; 11-27-2018 at 12:10 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #470 of 858 Old 11-28-2018, 01:38 PM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 948
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 587 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
In short, I consider that this new Christie projector is the new benchmark against which all other projectors will now need to be compared. So I am going to spend one more session with this other projector such that my review does precisely this. Also, I need to take some further measurements that I believe will help explain why the perceived performance is as good as it is

I think its clear that the Christie's benchmark numbers are well down the curve of diminishing returns. That does not mean it is not visibly the best, but few have compared it to another high on/off, high ANSI projector. For example if you take a Barco THOR and just increase the ANSI from 1000+:1 to 1500+:1 the improvement will be minimal, but if you take its 2000:1 (or HC 5000:1) on/off to 30,000:1 its magic , depth, color pop, etc. Conversely if you take a good LCOS projector and increase its on/off from 30,000:1 to 1,000,000 leaving ANSI at 300:1, again marginal improvement, but increase ANSI to 1000:1 and again magic. The move from the current (non-Christie) projectors to a 30,000:1 on/off and ANSI 950:1 is OLED dramatic. Given equal lumens I don't believe its possible for the eye to perceive the same level of improvement beyond that, better yes as dramatic doubtful. Just my opinion.
ailil likes this.
Lasalle is offline  
post #471 of 858 Old 11-28-2018, 01:52 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ericglo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Just below the US in South Florida
Posts: 11,919
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3656 Post(s)
Liked: 2070
I couldn't disagree more about going from 30k to 1 million to 1 on/off cr even with 300 to 1 ANSI. That isn't a minor increase in on/off cr and it would be very noticeable.


I realize you have a projecteromance with the pj. If it isn't much improved from what Darin, Kris and I saw at Cedia then I don't see it is a huge increase in picture quality.
markmon1 likes this.

Having fun playing the new mobile game Volley Village

Last edited by Ericglo; 11-29-2018 at 04:11 AM.
Ericglo is online now  
post #472 of 858 Old 11-28-2018, 05:24 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Art Sonneborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Battle Creek,MI USA
Posts: 24,273
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1297 Post(s)
Liked: 1730
I'm not one to say we need 25 million to one sequential contrast with high ANSI number to get a compelling engaging picture I do believe that we need a good balance of parameters and I'm sure with any there is diminishing return where that is hasn't been shown IMO. Any weakness compared to another projector, however ,will always end up as the talking point and each of us will have our priorities.


The good news with the Christie is we have something to compare it too sort of like an atomic clock for accuracy. There is also that pesky resale value thing which is not on or near the top of my list but nothing is future proof and I'm afraid we are nearing but not at the end of projection as the high end imaging technique for the home. Although the cost of wall systems are now very very high, I can't imagine it will stay that way for long. The window for projection, therefore, is open wide right now but likely will abruptly slam shut while most of us are still around here.


Art
Art Sonneborn is online now  
post #473 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 02:09 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
I think its clear that the Christie's benchmark numbers are well down the curve of diminishing returns. That does not mean it is not visibly the best, but few have compared it to another high on/off, high ANSI projector. For example if you take a Barco THOR and just increase the ANSI from 1000+:1 to 1500+:1 the improvement will be minimal, but if you take its 2000:1 (or HC 5000:1) on/off to 30,000:1 its magic , depth, color pop, etc. Conversely if you take a good LCOS projector and increase its on/off from 30,000:1 to 1,000,000 leaving ANSI at 300:1, again marginal improvement, but increase ANSI to 1000:1 and again magic. The move from the current (non-Christie) projectors to a 30,000:1 on/off and ANSI 950:1 is OLED dramatic. Given equal lumens I don't believe its possible for the eye to perceive the same level of improvement beyond that, better yes as dramatic doubtful. Just my opinion.
Yes and no

As far as contrast performance and hence dynamic range and black levels are concerned the ANSI contrast measurement is in itself not relevant to almost all actual video content. ANSI is 50% ADL and 99.9% of video content typically falls below this.

The reason why there is such good performance with a projector that has both high ANSI and comparatively high ON/OFF contrast measurements is not because the ANSI is high, but because the measurements IN-BETWEEN the ANSI and ON/OFF will be high, which is in fact wherein almost all video content typically resides.

This is why, with respect to this CHRISTIE projector, and in fact all projectors that I will be reviewing, I will be measuring what is the ADL contrast measurements from 1% - 20% as these are in fact the most relevant and hence important measurements.

You can most certainly have a projector with over 1,000:1 ANSI that looks terrible if the 5% - 20% ADL contrast is comparatively low.

That said, however, you are right that there are diminishing returns, but as good as is the video performance regarding the projector to which you refer, this Christie projector is without a doubt a significant step up in performance and in more ways than one. However, it is more expensive, so you basically get what you pay for in this regard. But I cannot agree that there is not much difference in performance between the two. Sorry.

I also disagree that an increase in ON/OFF from 30,000:1 to 1,000,000 leaving ANSI at 300:1 will produce only a marginal improvement. This will indubitably increase significantly what is the 1% - 10% ADL contrast which is wherein resides the majority of video content.

And just to be clear, as good as are the perceived black levels with that other projector, the black levels with this Christie are superior; where the most difference will be noticeable with fade-to-black and just above black, namely 0 - 1% ADL video content.

That said, however, you are absolutely right there are diminishing returns, which is to be expected. But the performance differences are not just with respect to contrast and black levels. There is also a step up in performance in multiple other aspects of video performance as well.

But just to be clear, these are both very high-end and high performance projectors we are talking about here, which is akin to debating what are the comparative performances of supercars versus hypercars


Last edited by ARROW-AV; 11-29-2018 at 02:26 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #474 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 05:10 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wookii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,574
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3024 Post(s)
Liked: 2232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
I think its clear that the Christie's benchmark numbers are well down the curve of diminishing returns. That does not mean it is not visibly the best, but few have compared it to another high on/off, high ANSI projector. For example if you take a Barco THOR and just increase the ANSI from 1000+:1 to 1500+:1 the improvement will be minimal, but if you take its 2000:1 (or HC 5000:1) on/off to 30,000:1 its magic , depth, color pop, etc. Conversely if you take a good LCOS projector and increase its on/off from 30,000:1 to 1,000,000 leaving ANSI at 300:1, again marginal improvement, but increase ANSI to 1000:1 and again magic. The move from the current (non-Christie) projectors to a 30,000:1 on/off and ANSI 950:1 is OLED dramatic. Given equal lumens I don't believe its possible for the eye to perceive the same level of improvement beyond that, better yes as dramatic doubtful. Just my opinion.
I agree what what other have said on this, sure a higher ANSI figure is nice to have but it only really affects the last 5-10% of content, and with the advent of HDR, the hjghlights in those kinds of scenes are brighter and our eye biasing levels the playing field between higher and lower ANSI images.

What is critical is the lower APL scenes (<5% APL) which form a much larger majority of content. That's where on/off is king, and where 30,000:1 leaves the image lacking, and each doubling of that figure delivers improvement in those scenes.
Wookii is offline  
post #475 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 11:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 948
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 587 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Yes and no

As far as contrast performance and hence dynamic range and black levels are concerned the ANSI contrast measurement is in itself not relevant to almost all actual video content. ANSI is 50% ADL and 99.9% of video content typically falls below this.

The reason why there is such good performance with a projector that has both high ANSI and comparatively high ON/OFF contrast measurements is not because the ANSI is high, but because the measurements IN-BETWEEN the ANSI and ON/OFF will be high, which is in fact wherein almost all video content typically resides.

This is why, with respect to this CHRISTIE projector, and in fact all projectors that I will be reviewing, I will be measuring what is the ADL contrast measurements from 1% - 20% as these are in fact the most relevant and hence important measurements.

You can most certainly have a projector with over 1,000:1 ANSI that looks terrible if the 5% - 20% ADL contrast is comparatively low.

That said, however, you are right that there are diminishing returns, but as good as is the video performance regarding the projector to which you refer, this Christie projector is without a doubt a significant step up in performance and in more ways than one. However, it is more expensive, so you basically get what you pay for in this regard. But I cannot agree that there is not much difference in performance between the two. Sorry.

I also disagree that an increase in ON/OFF from 30,000:1 to 1,000,000 leaving ANSI at 300:1 will produce only a marginal improvement. This will indubitably increase significantly what is the 1% - 10% ADL contrast which is wherein resides the majority of video content.

And just to be clear, as good as are the perceived black levels with that other projector, the black levels with this Christie are superior; where the most difference will be noticeable with fade-to-black and just above black, namely 0 - 1% ADL video content.

That said, however, you are absolutely right there are diminishing returns, which is to be expected. But the performance differences are not just with respect to contrast and black levels. There is also a step up in performance in multiple other aspects of video performance as well.

But just to be clear, these are both very high-end and high performance projectors we are talking about here, which is akin to debating what are the comparative performances of supercars versus hypercars


Hi Nigel, I hope to see you again when you come out here. I wrote my comment to address your quote that I included, specifically to "help explain why the perceived performance is as good as it is". Your note here re-enforces the point I was trying to make that you have to have both high on/off and high ANSI to get dramatic improvement in HDR performance, one without the other (even if taken to the extreme) will not get you there.



As your partial review (that I linked to above) indicated the performance gap between existing production projectors and that one is dramatic like moving to an OLED. Obviously none of perceived performance improvements are changed (compared to the existing projectors) by the Christie. We threw the hardest HDR content available at that projector and it sailed through it with OLED like performance. I remember one scene you showed that was your HDR reference, It was a very dark water scene where points of bright lights started emerging from below and dancing under the surface. You said it was "unwatchable" on the current high on/off projectors and only OLED did it justice. You then noted the projector played it so well it may have even exceeded your observed OLED performance.


My point on diminishing returns is I seriously doubt you be able to find HDR movie content that is "unwatchable" on this projector and be suddenly transformed by the Christie. Your quote seems to question why the performance of this projector was so good when the Christie measured on/off exceeded it by several orders of magnitude (and ANSI by about 10%).



The point is I don't believe the HDR improvement attained by increasing both on/off and ANSI (at the same time) is linear. If you start at the current available projectors performance, the initial improvement curve is quite steep (I observed with a Barco Prometheus that was modified from 2K:1 to 10K:1) and then starts to level off at a much shallower slope. Test patterns may be able to extend the steeper slope a little but with real content I believe the other projector is already on the shallower slope. This may have to do with how fast your iris can react in high contrast viewing where the peaks are really punched out on the screen. The lag will lower the perceived black floor. This is backed up by the perceived brightness of the other projector. I've watched multiple projectors that exceeded 15K lumens on that 11 foot screen and non needed to be put on lower settings until this 7K lumen projector was too much running all out. Granted its a very efficient design as it does not throw away any light, but that perceived brightness with an inky black floor tells me its approaching the viewable contrast limits while viewing real content. I'm sure there is some play in there depending upon content and of course test patterns but again I don't believe further increasing on/off and ANSI will produce the kind of dramatic improvement that was initially achieved against the current projectors.
Lasalle is offline  
post #476 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 12:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 948
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 587 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wookii View Post
I agree what what other have said on this, sure a higher ANSI figure is nice to have but it only really affects the last 5-10% of content, and with the advent of HDR, the hjghlights in those kinds of scenes are brighter and our eye biasing levels the playing field between higher and lower ANSI images.

What is critical is the lower APL scenes (<5% APL) which form a much larger majority of content. That's where on/off is king, and where 30,000:1 leaves the image lacking, and each doubling of that figure delivers improvement in those scenes.

I should preference my comment with a reference point for measured calibrated on/off. My reference projector for this among the current croup is the top JVC bulb projectors. I'm referring to Nigel's measured results since he also measured the projector in question. His measured on/off for the bulb JVC's was 30,000:1 about the same for projector in question. His calibrated measurements for the JVC and Sony lasers are closer to 15,000:1. Neither of these projectors can produce the 3D depth of picture or color pop and peak punch of an OLED or the high on/off and high ANSI projectors. Even with the bulb JVC projector an inky black star lite sky is 2D with no depth and the stars don't punch out almost coming out of the screen. You can see this effect on CLDIS or the best OLED, increasing on/off alone will not give it to you.
Lasalle is offline  
post #477 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 12:17 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
Hi Nigel, I hope to see you again when you come out here. I wrote my comment to address your quote that I included, specifically to "help explain why the perceived performance is as good as it is". Your note here re-enforces the point I was trying to make that you have to have both high on/off and high ANSI to get dramatic improvement in HDR performance, one without the other (even if taken to the extreme) will not get you there.

As your partial review (that I linked to above) indicated the performance gap between existing production projectors and that one is dramatic like moving to an OLED. Obviously none of perceived performance improvements are changed (compared to the existing projectors) by the Christie. We threw the hardest HDR content available at that projector and it sailed through it with OLED like performance. I remember one scene you showed that was your HDR reference, It was a very dark water scene where points of bright lights started emerging from below and dancing under the surface. You said it was "unwatchable" on the current high on/off projectors and only OLED did it justice. You then noted the projector played it so well it may have even exceeded your observed OLED performance.

My point on diminishing returns is I seriously doubt you be able to find HDR movie content that is "unwatchable" on this projector and be suddenly transformed by the Christie. Your quote seems to question why the performance of this projector was so good when the Christie measured on/off exceeded it by several orders of magnitude (and ANSI by about 10%).

The point is I don't believe the HDR improvement attained by increasing both on/off and ANSI (at the same time) is linear. If you start at the current available projectors performance, the initial improvement curve is quite steep (I observed with a Barco Prometheus that was modified from 2K:1 to 10K:1) and then starts to level off at a much shallower slope. Test patterns may be able to extend the steeper slope a little but with real content I believe the other projector is already on the shallower slope. This may have to do with how fast your iris can react in high contrast viewing where the peaks are really punched out on the screen. The lag will lower the perceived black floor. This is backed up by the perceived brightness of the other projector. I've watched multiple projectors that exceeded 15K lumens on that 11 foot screen and non needed to be put on lower settings until this 7K lumen projector was too much running all out. Granted its a very efficient design as it does not throw away any light, but that perceived brightness with an inky black floor tells me its approaching the viewable contrast limits while viewing real content. I'm sure there is some play in there depending upon content and of course test patterns but again I don't believe further increasing on/off and ANSI will produce the kind of dramatic improvement that was initially achieved against the current projectors.
Increasing the ANSI most certainly won't produce any kind of perceivable improvement whatsoever, because the limit of human perception with respect to ANSI contrast is circa 1,000:1 so both projectors achieve this.

Increasing the ON/OFF however from 30,000:1 to 1000,000:1 will produce a perceivable improvement, because the perception of contrast is approximately logarithmic; wherein 2,000 - 30,000 = 15 times greater, whereas 30,000 - 1,000,000 = 33 times greater. However, the phenomenon to which I believe you are referring is more to do with the fact that there is a minimum threshold for ON/OFF contrast below which the black floor is so poor that it is very very noticeable and in fact considered to be intolerable by many, myself included. And when going from 2,000 - 30,000:1 ON/OFF this has the additional benefit of transitioning from intolerable to very good, and so this could indeed be considered to be more fundamental than when going from 30,000:1 to 1000,000:1. However, there will be a significant perceivable difference when going from 30,000:1 to 1000,000:1 nonetheless.

But again, I feel the need to reiterate that the conversation we are having here is akin to debating the comparative performance of a supercar with a hypercar, where in both instances the performance is incredible, it's simply that the hypercar is yet even more incredible

And yes, it would be great to see you again when I next visit sunny Florida

Lasalle likes this.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #478 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 12:29 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
I should preference my comment with a reference point for measured calibrated on/off. My reference projector for this among the current croup is the top JVC bulb projectors. I'm referring to Nigel's measured results since he also measured the projector in question. His measured on/off for the bulb JVC's was 30,000:1 about the same for projector in question. His calibrated measurements for the JVC and Sony lasers are closer to 15,000:1. Neither of these projectors can produce the 3D depth of picture or color pop and peak punch of an OLED or the high on/off and high ANSI projectors. Even with the bulb JVC projector an inky black star lite sky is 2D with no depth and the stars don't punch out almost coming out of the screen. You can see this effect on CLDIS or the best OLED, increasing on/off alone will not give it to you.
That was with respect to the laser, not bulb JVC, namely the JVC RS4500/Z1. The bulb projectors will actually measure peak ON/OFF with usage settings more like circa 300,000:1 however this is whilst also producing only circa 1,500 - 1,600 lumens light output and with comparatively significantly lower ANSI and mid-range ADL contrast. But yes, I absolutely agree that the pop and depth of the projector to which you are referring and this Christie projector are in a completely different universe as compared with all other home theater projectors as of right now

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #479 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 12:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
Lasalle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 948
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 587 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
That was with respect to the laser, not bulb JVC, namely the JVC RS4500/Z1. The bulb projectors will actually measure peak ON/OFF with usage settings more like circa 300,000:1 however this is whilst also producing only circa 1,500 - 1,600 lumens light output and with comparatively significantly lower ANSI and mid-range ADL contrast. But yes, I absolutely agree that the pop and depth of the projector to which you are referring and this Christie projector are in a completely different universe as compared with all other home theater projectors as of right now


Hi Nigel, You may want to go back and fix your mini review of the other projector where you say:


• High ON/OFF contrast (circa 30,000:1 at typical light output levels; so about on par with the JVC eShift projectors)

As you know I'm not much of a test pattern person but never thought there was much of a correlation between claimed and measured on these numbers.
Lasalle is offline  
post #480 of 858 Old 11-29-2018, 12:58 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lasalle View Post
Hi Nigel, You may want to go back and fix your mini review of the other projector where you say:


• High ON/OFF contrast (circa 30,000:1 at typical light output levels; so about on par with the JVC eShift projectors)

As you know I'm not much of a test pattern person but never thought there was much of a correlation between claimed and measured on these numbers.
Good catch. Yes that should read JVC laser projectors...

ARROW-AV is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

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