AVS Forum banner
61 - 80 of 585 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by thepoohcontinuum /forum/post/21421490


1) Provide an EDID report of your TV. To do this, run the Monitor Asset Manager (found here ), and then copy/paste the contents from the "Asset Information" window pane.


2) Open Catalyst / AMD Vision Center, and tell me what Pixel Format setting you're currently using. It should look something like this .



I downloaded and ran that Monitor Asset Manager program. I'll include the results below, but I'm not sure how accurate they are. It shows the manufacturer date as being in late 2010, but that's certainly not the case. The back of the TV says it was manufactured in September 2011. Uhhmmm... Maybe that late 2010 date is just when the TV was originally designed?


I also checked AMD Catalyst Control Center. It shows the pixel format for the Samsung TV display to be YCbCr 4:4:4 Pixel Format. I've never changed that, so that's just what it defaulted to. Should I be using one of the RGB 4:4:4 options instead? Would one of those provide better quality?




From my 2011 Samsung UN32D6000 LED-LCD HDTV...


-------begin copy/paste-------

Monitor

Model name............... SAMSUNG

Manufacturer............. Samsung

Plug and Play ID......... SAM07C3

Serial number............ 1

Manufacture date......... 2010, ISO week 46

Filter driver............ None

-------------------------

EDID revision............ 1.3

Input signal type........ Digital

Color bit depth.......... Undefined

Display type............. RGB color

Screen size.............. 700 x 390 mm (31.5 in)

Power management......... Not supported

Extension blocs.......... 1 (CEA-EXT)

-------------------------

DDC/CI................... Not supported


Color characteristics

Default color space...... Non-sRGB

Display gamma............ 2.20

Red chromaticity......... Rx 0.640 - Ry 0.330

Green chromaticity....... Gx 0.300 - Gy 0.600

Blue chromaticity........ Bx 0.150 - By 0.060

White point (default).... Wx 0.313 - Wy 0.329

Additional descriptors... None


Timing characteristics

Horizontal scan range.... 26-81kHz

Vertical scan range...... 24-75Hz

Video bandwidth.......... 230MHz

CVT standard............. Not supported

GTF standard............. Not supported

Additional descriptors... None

Preferred timing......... Yes

Native/preferred timing.. 1920x1080p at 60Hz (16:9)

Modeline............... "1920x1080" 148.500 1920 2008 2052 2200 1080 1084 1089 1125 +hsync +vsync

Detailed timing #1....... 1360x768p at 60Hz (16:9)

Modeline............... "1360x768" 85.500 1360 1424 1536 1792 768 771 777 795 +hsync +vsync


Standard timings supported

720 x 400p at 70Hz - IBM VGA

640 x 480p at 60Hz - IBM VGA

640 x 480p at 67Hz - Apple Mac II

640 x 480p at 72Hz - VESA

640 x 480p at 75Hz - VESA

800 x 600p at 60Hz - VESA

800 x 600p at 72Hz - VESA

800 x 600p at 75Hz - VESA

832 x 624p at 75Hz - Apple Mac II

1024 x 768p at 60Hz - VESA

1024 x 768p at 70Hz - VESA

1024 x 768p at 75Hz - VESA

1280 x 1024p at 75Hz - VESA

1152 x 870p at 75Hz - Apple Mac II

1152 x 864p at 75Hz - VESA STD

1280 x 800p at 60Hz - VESA STD

1280 x 960p at 60Hz - VESA STD

1280 x 1024p at 60Hz - VESA STD

1440 x 900p at 60Hz - VESA STD

1440 x 900p at 75Hz - VESA STD

1680 x 1050p at 60Hz - VESA STD

1600 x 1200p at 60Hz - VESA STD


EIA/CEA-861 Information

Revision number.......... 3

IT underscan............. Supported

Basic audio.............. Supported

YCbCr 4:4:4.............. Supported

YCbCr 4:2:2.............. Supported

Native formats........... 1

Detailed timing #1....... 1280x720p at 60Hz (16:9)

Modeline............... "1280x720" 74.250 1280 1390 1430 1650 720 725 730 750 +hsync +vsync

Detailed timing #2....... 1920x1080i at 60Hz (16:9)

Modeline............... "1920x1080" 74.250 1920 2008 2052 2200 1080 1084 1094 1124 interlace +hsync +vsync

Detailed timing #3....... 720x480p at 60Hz (16:9)

Modeline............... "720x480" 27.000 720 736 798 858 480 489 495 525 -hsync -vsync


CE video identifiers (VICs) - timing/formats supported

1920 x 1080p at 60Hz - HDTV (16:9, 1:1) [Native]

1280 x 720p at 60Hz - HDTV (16:9, 1:1)

1920 x 1080i at 60Hz - HDTV (16:9, 1:1)

720 x 480p at 60Hz - EDTV (16:9, 32:27)

1920 x 1080p at 24Hz - HDTV (16:9, 1:1)

1920 x 1080p at 30Hz - HDTV (16:9, 1:1)

NB: NTSC refresh rate = (Hz*1000)/1001


CE audio data (formats supported)

LPCM 2-channel, 16/20/24 bit depths at 32/44/48 kHz


CE speaker allocation data

Channel configuration.... 2.0

Front left/right......... Yes

Front LFE................ No

Front center............. No

Rear left/right.......... No

Rear center.............. No

Front left/right center.. No

Rear left/right center... No

Rear LFE................. No


CE video capability data

CE scan behavior......... Supports overscan and underscan

IT scan behavior......... Supports overscan and underscan

PT scan behavior......... Not supported

RGB quantization range... Not supported

YCC quantization range... Not supported


CE colorimetry data

xvYCC709 support......... Yes

xvYCC601 support......... Yes

sYCC601 support.......... No

AdobeYCC601 support...... No

AdobeRGB support......... No

Metadata profile flags... 0x01


CE vendor specific data (VSDB)

IEEE registration number. 0x000C03

CEC physical address..... 1.0.0.0

Supports AI (ACP, ISRC).. Yes

Supports 48bpp........... No

Supports 36bpp........... Yes

Supports 30bpp........... Yes

Supports YCbCr 4:4:4..... Yes

Supports dual-link DVI... No

Maximum TMDS clock....... 225MHz


Report information

Date generated........... 12/31/2011

Software revision........ 2.60.0.972

Data source.............. Real-time 0x0021

Operating system......... 6.1.7601.2.Service Pack 1


Raw data


00,FF,FF,FF,FF,FF,FF,00,4C,2D,C3,07,01,00,00,00,2E,14,01,03, 80,46,27,78,0A,EE,91,A3,54,4C,99,26,


0F,50,54,BD,EF,80,71,4F,81,00,81,40,81,80,95,00,95,0F,B3,00, A9,40,02,3A,80,18,71,38,2D,40,58,2C,


45,00,A0,5A,00,00,00,1E,66,21,50,B0,51,00,1B,30,40,70,36,00, A0,5A,00,00,00,1E,00,00,00,FD,00,18,


4B,1A,51,17,00,0A,20,20,20,20,20,20,00,00,00,FC,00,53,41,4D, 53,55,4E,47,0A,20,20,20,20,20,01,78,


02,03,22,F1,46,90,04,05,03,20,22,23,09,07,07,83,01,00,00,E2, 00,0F,E3,05,03,01,67,03,0C,00,10,00,


B8,2D,01,1D,00,72,51,D0,1E,20,6E,28,55,00,A0,5A,00,00,00,1E, 01,1D,80,18,71,1C,16,20,58,2C,25,00,


A0,5A,00,00,00,9E,8C,0A,D0,8A,20,E0,2D,10,10,3E,96,00,A0,5A, 00,00,00,18,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,


00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00, 00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,EF

-------end copy/paste-------
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
470 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshZH /forum/post/21423110


You have to calibrate sharpness

The problem is that sharpness is exist in PC mode only. In non-PC (YCbCr) mode Desktop looks perfect, photos look ok, and video looks not perfect anyway die to all the lossy conversions RGB > YCbCr etc.

I tried to calibrate a picture in PC mode over video driver and TV settings, but no luck. Picture brightness and contrast are just screwed and it seems not fixable. I guess its just a broken firmware in LG TVs for RGB input and there are no solutions in the net, cause only few people who care and noone can't fix that part of firmware.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
FYI, my 2010 Sony 32EX700 passes 4:4:4 in Graphics mode with an HDMI/HDMI cable (no audio). Game mode may also work, I didn't try it. General mode does not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by thepoohcontinuum /forum/post/21387822


Somewhere online, I read a brief statement that said going from 4:2:0 to 4:4:4 meant quadrupling the bandwidth. Although admittedly, your explanation sounds much more plausible. Let me read a bit more on it and I'll update accordingly. Thanks for the heads up!

4:4:4 rgb: 24 bit per pixel

4:4:4 ycbcr: 24 bit per pixel

4:2:2 ycbcr: 16 bit per pixel

4:2:0 ycbcr: 12 bit per pixel


Note that bluray is lossy, not lossless. Moving to 4:4:4 could in principle be compensated by compressing more. That would lead to a loss of high-frequency details, just like 4:2:0 subsampling leads to a loss of high-frequency details. My guess is that if could improve quality/bitrate trade-off for those few cases where chroma subsampling really is an issue.


-k
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts
Thank you for this nice initiative.


Now, I remember similar problems 4 years ago when I bought my existing tv. It seems that they never learn: the really simple stuff that just "should work" often does not. Rather, they put effort into meaningless "smart-tv" functionality...


Now, this interests me: Can these tvs do 4:4:4, 24p/50p/60p 1920x1080 non-scaled/non-overscanned _at the same time_? Seems to me that they define a PC input that may have lousy video specs, then save all of the video goodies for the non-PC inputs.


If I have a PC connected that is used for still-images, bluray, occasional surfing, why should it not do a decent job for all of those without me changing tv modes (or even worse swapping HDMI connectors)?


-k
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete4 /forum/post/21417888


I forgot to mention another thing: in theory at least since TV should be getting full luma, black text on white screen should be crisp, but on mine it isn't. Most small fonts are one pixel wide as they should be, but some are 2 pixel wide, like there was some extra processing done there. I was trying different menu options to fix it, but there is not much left in PC mode and I did double check for overscanning as originally for some strangest reason I can't comprehend both video card and TV defaulted to overscan (what's up with that prehistoric relic of analog TV? Why is it even here, on digital TV with no analog OTA channels and at least in my case no analog cable channels).

Can you tell overscan is my personal "pet peeve"?

Wild guess:

The image pipeline does scale any input up by 5%. If you select no overscan, it will simply scale it back down by 5% so as to fit the panel, but since those two scaling passes are not perfect inverses, you get some artifacts.


Sounds like a stupid thing to do, but that does not mean that someone did not do it...


-k
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
885 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by knutinh /forum/post/21436769


Thank you for this nice initiative.


Now, I remember similar problems 4 years ago when I bought my existing tv. It seems that they never learn: the really simple stuff that just "should work" often does not. Rather, they put effort into meaningless "smart-tv" functionality...


Now, this interests me: Can these tvs do 4:4:4, 24p/50p/60p 1920x1080 non-scaled/non-overscanned _at the same time_? Seems to me that they define a PC input that may have lousy video specs, then save all of the video goodies for the non-PC inputs.


If I have a PC connected that is used for still-images, bluray, occasional surfing, why should it not do a decent job for all of those without me changing tv modes (or even worse swapping HDMI connectors)?


-k

It depends on the TV. You have to look at them on a case by case basis.


Michael
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
I posted this in the input lag topic as well. Please note video card HDMI setting is already set to HDMI "disable audio".

Sony Bravia KDL-32BX420


For Input Lag Test, TV is compared with NEC FE791 17" CRT Monitor @ 1280x720 clone mode. CRT cannot output 1920x1080. Video Card used is Nvidia 9800GTX+.


For Chroma 4:4:4 Test, TV is set to 1920x1080 over DVI-VGA or DVI-HDMI.


Graphics Scene Mode via VGA Connection

Input Lag


Average is 40ms - 50ms.



Chroma Test


Passes. Red Lines are solid. All Grey Text are clear, camera could not capture it properly. Text is very clear.




Game Scene Mode via VGA Connection

Input Lag


Average is 30ms - 50ms. Roughly the same as graphics mode but quality takes a dive as chroma test fails in this mode.



chroma Test


Fails. Red Lines are not solid. Red, Blue and Magenta text are blurred and barely readable.




Graphics Scene Mode via DVI-HDMI Connection

Input Lag


Average is 50ms - 70ms.



Chroma Test


Fails. Red Lines are not solid. Magenta text is blurred and barely readable.




Game Scene Mode via DVI-HDMI Connection

Input Lag


Average is 70ms.



Chroma Test


Fails. Red Lines are not solid. Red, Blue and Magenta text are blurred and barely readable.





Since I'm running the screen at 720p for input lag testing, the scaling probably introduced some lag. The TV has a widescreen "normal" mode, which disables scaling of 720p content and does 1:1 pixel mapping. This improved input lag significantly. Input Lag was around 17ms - 50ms.




Hence, if you run 1080p via VGA in Graphics Mode, the result should be similar.



Nevertheless, the input lag is too much in HDMI mode. Even in 1080p Game Mode, I can feel my actions delayed in BF3. The fact that text looks like crap using any mode over HDMI is also a major disappointment. Viewing angles are poor. You have around a 5 degree viewing angle before you see funky antiglare patterns on the screen. Not a major problem if you are using as a computer monitor as your head won't be off-center anyway. Needless to say, I won't be keeping this TV.


The only redeeming qualities are that the colors are pretty decent. Blacks are dark for a LCD. There is zero/minimal backlight bleeding. Watching movies in a dark room isn't too bad.


If you are considering this TV as a computer monitor, the only good mode for this TV appears to be VGA Graphics mode.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
Discussion Starter · #69 ·
Nice post jimmyzaas. Interesting to see 4:4:4 failure even with Game mode, even though it works with other Sony's. Does the BX420 have a Graphics mode? If so, could you see if 4:4:4 works on that?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,031 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by knutinh /forum/post/21436725


4:4:4 rgb: 24 bit per pixel

4:4:4 ycbcr: 24 bit per pixel

4:2:2 ycbcr: 16 bit per pixel

4:2:0 ycbcr: 12 bit per pixel


Note that bluray is lossy, not lossless. Moving to 4:4:4 could in principle be compensated by compressing more. That would lead to a loss of high-frequency details, just like 4:2:0 subsampling leads to a loss of high-frequency details. My guess is that if could improve quality/bitrate trade-off for those few cases where chroma subsampling really is an issue.


-k

I don't believe you can say that chroma compression leads to high frequency detail loss. ALL detail of an image is carried in the luma channel. For example, with component input on a TV you can disconnect the two color component inputs and still see all the image detail in B/W. The color components just add the color to the image. IIRC, the loss of high frequency detail loss is a result of the video compression codec - MPEG, etc. - setup parameters and filtering of the video, not the chroma compression. You can still have crappy looking compressed video with YCbCr 4:4:4. Chroma subsampling/compression is just another way to further reduce the video data after the "raw" video was compressed with some codec.


It would be a nice experiment to watch two encodings of a movie from the same master. One with YCbCr 4:4:4 output and one with the usual YCbCr 4:2:0. I would bet that one couldn't tell the difference when viewed normally. Only once you started dissecting and comparing frames would you most likely be able to see the differences if you looked hard enough.


larry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
403 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by PooperScooper /forum/post/21438811


I don't believe you can say that chroma compression leads to high frequency detail loss. ALL detail of an image is carried in the luma channel.

A color image contains 3 channels - typically either r,g and b or Y Cb and Cr. Each of these channels contains spatial information that can be cathegorized as high frequency or low frequency. If you insert a lowpass filter in either channel, that channel will experience high-frequency loss.


The reason why YCbCr (and friends) is so popular is that most of the information (even more of the relevant information) is concentrated in a single channel ("Y" or "black and white"), while the color difference channels tend to be smooth and less important. Therefore they can be subsampled and harshly compressed. See wikipedia illustration below.


Quote:
For example, with component input on a TV you can disconnect the two color component inputs and still see all the image detail in B/W.

Except all of the image detail is not contained in the B/W channel.
Quote:
he color components just add the color to the image.

And the luminance component just add the luminance information to the image. All are needed for a realistic color image.
Quote:
IIRC, the loss of high frequency detail loss is a result of the video compression codec - MPEG, etc. - setup parameters and filtering of the video, not the chroma compression.

Chroma subsampling leads to blurring or aliasing of the spatial information contained in the color difference channels. For content with sharp color transitions, this can be quite visible.
Quote:
You can still have crappy looking compressed video with YCbCr 4:4:4.

Sure. You can also have crappy video from a lossless 1080p60 rgb 4:4:4 file - if the source was a cell-phone camera.
Quote:
Chroma subsampling/compression is just another way to further reduce the video data after the "raw" video was compressed with some codec.

Chroma subsampling happens before the codec, not after. And a very similar high-frequency loss/bandwidth reduction can be implemented by setting all of the high-frequency DCT coefficients to zero in the lossy encoder (assuming intra coding for simplicity).
Quote:
It would be a nice experiment to watch two encodings of a movie from the same master. One with YCbCr 4:4:4 output and one with the usual YCbCr 4:2:0. I would bet that one couldn't tell the difference when viewed normally. Only once you started dissecting and comparing frames would you most likely be able to see the differences if you looked hard enough.

For most content (such as the image above) there simply isnt much high-frequency info in the color difference channels. Subsampling then has no penalty. For other content (such as the test patterns used in this thread), the subsampling leads to visible errors.


-k
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
608 Posts
Bump,


In the OP's opinion, or anyone else qualified to answer, would the following test be valid to determine if a panel is 4:4:4 capable? Or possibly as a quick and dirty test?


If the test proves to be no more than a "crutch" for the lazy, please let me know, and i promise to delete it to prevent it from becoming a crutch
.



- Click the above link, then mouse over to the top of the webpage to make the dropdown menu appear.


- Click the "Text" link in the dropdown menu.


- Adjust the rightside sliders till you have a dark background.


- Adjust the leftside sliders to change the color of your text, alternate between red, blue and yellow text over darker backgrounds.


- You can drag the slider window around to test different sections of your LCD panel. Not sure if anyone would be able to detect uniformity issues that way but it wouldn't hurt to try.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,548 Posts
Any test should be valid as long as following conditions are met:

1. need one pixel wide line made of one of primary colors, like red

2. background with the same intensity as line but different color.

3. way to verify the line is 1 pixel wide

To be honest I have no idea why TV sets fail the test used in this forum, even with chroma 422 they all should pass this test. Since that test has one pixel wide red lines on the black background, lets say 2 pixels next to each other are one red and one black on the original: and they share color (hence chroma 422) so they both red, however the red pixel has Luma set to lets say 50%, so it's visibly red, the other pixel has luma 0 so even if it's red, still should show black and the test should be passed. I believe TV's fail this test not because of chroma 422, but post processing, namely color interpolation. The black pixel, #2 instead of being displayed as black, if one followed luma, is somehow averaged from 1st (red) and third (black) or something like that. This forces errors and artifacts even on white screen with black text which should never happen.

Your linked test seems fine to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
Discussion Starter · #75 ·
^^ I agree with pete4's assessment about the vanity.dk test.


Your 422 scenario is interesting. Because like you said, even if a TV is only 422 capable, the single-pixel width tests should still pass since luma would "cancel out" the erroneous adjacent pixel. The theory about permanent post-processing (even if disabled in the menu) seems believable, since the TVs that are known to be 444 capable are generally the cheapo/barebone TVs that don't have any image "improvement" features in the first place.


Still, I'm a little hesitant in believing it completely. Because from a software developer perspective, coding a post processing effect that's partially enabled seems to be more effort than coding a simple 0 = OFF / 1 = ON. We'll never know. We need to make friends with TV firmware developers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete4 /forum/post/21467927


To be honest I have no idea why TV sets fail the test used in this forum, even with chroma 422 they all should pass this test. Since that test has one pixel wide red lines on the black background, lets say 2 pixels next to each other are one red and one black on the original: and they share color (hence chroma 422) so they both red, however the red pixel has Luma set to lets say 50%, so it's visibly red, the other pixel has luma 0 so even if it's red, still should show black and the test should be passed.

That's not how quite how luma works.


Look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:YU...00_percent.png - this is the plane of colors all corresponding to a luma of 0.


For the specific example in this thread, the RGB triplet is (180,16,16) or (because I'm going to be lazy and use floating point for the rest of my post) (0.706, 0.063, 0.063). Using the Rec. 709 matrix this results in a YUV triple of (0.199, -0.064, 0.394). If the neighboring pixels get half the chroma, that results in a YUV triple of (0, -0.032, 0.197). Converting back to RGB, that's (0.252, -0.068, -0.068), or (64, 0, 0) in 8-bit (clipping negative color.)


At some point when I'm less lazy I'll finish a test pattern that has alternating red/blue and red/green lines with the same luma value, which are completely unrepresentable subsampled and should make it obvious when TVs are doing chroma subsampling rather than blurring.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Just tested a Sony KDL-46HX729 hooked up to a HTPC with a Radeon 6850 and sound enabled over HDMI and got good results after making a few tweaks on the set. (see attachment for picture of screen) My guess is that 4:4:4 should work on any Sony "HX" model. Picture quality is much improved when viewing pictures from our digital cameras.


TV settings:

1) [Home] > "Picture & Display" > "Pro Picture Setup" > "HDMI Dynamic Range" > "HDMI 2" > "Full"

2) [Options] --> "Scene Select" --> "Graphics"

3) [Home] > "Picture & Display" > "Screen" > "Auto Display Area" > "Off"

4) [Home] > "Picture & Display" > "Screen" > "Display Area" > "Full Pixel"


Radeon CCC settings:

1) "My Digital Flat Panels" > Pixel Format > "RGB 4:4:4 Pixel Format PC Standard (Full RGB)



Regards,

bspvette86
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
Discussion Starter · #78 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by bspvette86 /forum/post/21473960


Just tested a Sony KDL-46HX729 hooked up to a HTPC with a Radeon 6850 and sound enabled over HDMI and got good results after making a few tweaks on the set.

Good stuff. Are you using a DVI->HDMI or HDMI->HDMI cable?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by thepoohcontinuum /forum/post/21474366


Good stuff. Are you using a DVI->HDMI or HDMI->HDMI cable?

HDMI from the PC direct to the TV with sound enabled and working. FYI I noticed that the test charts have compression artifacts and should really be recreated in a lossless format for accurate testing results. Zoom in on the images to like 800% and you should see what I mean.


Regards,

bspvette86
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,548 Posts
The chart is saved in "PNG" format and I believe png uses lossless compression, so there should be no loss of detail or artifacts. I also noticed couple "errors", this could have been put there during chart creation, maybe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bspvette86 /forum/post/21475939


HDMI from the PC direct to the TV with sound enabled and working. FYI I noticed that the test charts have compression artifacts and should really be recreated in a lossless format for accurate testing results. Zoom in on the images to like 800% and you should see what I mean.


Regards,

bspvette86
 
61 - 80 of 585 Posts
Top