AVS Forum banner

25761 - 25780 of 29535 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
Thanks, Does the EF-2000 and Autocal get the color to 95 percent calibrated or is it necessary to still have to learn Calman etc?
Autocal is good but most say it is 90% of a real calibration. I would say there are 3 paths (Best, Better, Good), do each every 300-1000 hours on a bulb based projector.

1. Pay a pro and get the best perfomrance out of the setup
2. Learn all the software a pro might use and get the right insturments. Spend a bunch of time and money to learn "display calibration". You willl never have the experince of the pro so you will learn as you go.
3. Accept autocal as "good enough" (I fall into this camp).

This is all about chasing the "Best" a given projector can be. Autocal is a nice feature that JVC has in my book.

Have Fun!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,587 Posts
Just curious what you or others may have measured as brightness differences using the filter vs no filter?
One other question I had is the difference between color saturation and color volume. If both projectors have the same lamps when you insert a color filter in the path the saturation may increase but it seems the color volume would then have to decrease as the brightness has decreased due to the filter. Does that sound right or am I climbing the wrong tree:).
Filter on, full panel zoom, 130" scope screen 1.0 gain (no lens) = 30.x ftL
Filter off, full panel zoom, 130" scope screen 1.0 gain (no lens) = 34.x ftL

I don't remember the decimals but it ended up being 3.3/3.4 ish drop. So right at 10%. No way it's cutting half the light.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,053 Posts
They are barely getting 75 nits on that setup
Reading some of the responses from the review it seems the reviewers method of testing is to have the meter facing the projector at about 8’. That would be around a 80” screen at wide throw give or take a few inches.
Both the NX5 and NX9 were tested in this manner. Why the big difference in brightness? I guess filter in use on the NX9 and bulb variances as some suggested.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,815 Posts
Reading some of the responses from the review it seems the reviewers method of testing is to have the meter facing the projector at about 8’. That would be around a 80” screen at wide throw give or take a few inches.
Both the NX5 and NX9 were tested in this manner. Why the big difference in brightness? I guess filter in use on the NX9 and bulb variances as some suggested.
Even at 80", it would take 2.0 gain to get those numbers. I don't know what you do with that review, use it for TP? You sure can't trust any of his numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,811 Posts
Autocal is good but most say it is 90% of a real calibration. I would say there are 3 paths (Best, Better, Good), do each every 300-1000 hours on a bulb based projector.

1. Pay a pro and get the best perfomrance out of the setup
2. Learn all the software a pro might use and get the right insturments. Spend a bunch of time and money to learn "display calibration". You willl never have the experince of the pro so you will learn as you go.
3. Accept autocal as "good enough" (I fall into this camp).

This is all about chasing the "Best" a given projector can be. Autocal is a nice feature that JVC has in my book.

Have Fun!
I think I’ll be in the 3rd camp, as long as there is an improvement and doesn’t make things worse...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,866 Posts
Even at 80", it would take 2.0 gain to get those numbers. I don't know what you do with that review, use it for TP? You sure can't trust any of his numbers.
I don’t think they are using a specific screen size. The NX9 review says “This increases to 267 nits with no zoom and decreases to 76 nits on maximum zoom” which to me sounds like they were just zooming from one end to the other without moving the projector to maintain a constant image size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,815 Posts
I don’t think they are using a specific screen size. The NX9 review says “This increases to 267 nits with no zoom and decreases to 76 nits on maximum zoom” which to me sounds like they were just zooming from one end to the other without moving the projector to maintain a constant image size.
I was going by the earlier post where they said the review listed 460 nits of brightness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,067 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,809 Posts
Should be around 650-700 lumens at -15.
Finally measured this tonight after a watching session.

With 315 hours on my bulb, all iris groups calibrated with autocal and Spyder5 / i1 Pro 2.

Measured with this meter up against the center of the screen:

https://aemc.com/products/environmental-testers/lightmeter-CA813

Code:
iris    fc      lumens
0	28.4	1549
-1	28.3	1543
-2	28	1527
-3	27	1473
-4	26.8	1462
-5	26.3	1434
-6	26	1418
-7	25.4	1385
-8	25.1	1369
-9	24.1	1314
-10	23.8	1298
-11	22.8	1244
-12	22.9	1249
-13	21.8	1189
-14	19.8	1080
-15	17.5	954
I would say that these are also about 5% low from a new bulb as I used to get ~29.8fc out of the box on iris 0 which is 5% more than now at 315 hours. 5% more would put the -15 iris right at 1001 lumens by my measurement when my bulb was new.
 

·
Registered
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | B&W 802D3, HTM1D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
8,435 Posts
Finally measured this tonight after a watching session.

With 315 hours on my bulb, all iris groups calibrated with autocal and Spyder5 / i1 Pro 2.

Measured with this meter up against the center of the screen:

https://aemc.com/products/environmental-testers/lightmeter-CA813

Code:
iris    fc      lumens
0	28.4	1549
-1	28.3	1543
-2	28	1527
-3	27	1473
-4	26.8	1462
-5	26.3	1434
-6	26	1418
-7	25.4	1385
-8	25.1	1369
-9	24.1	1314
-10	23.8	1298
-11	22.8	1244
-12	22.9	1249
-13	21.8	1189
-14	19.8	1080
-15	17.5	954
I would say that these are also about 5% low from a new bulb as I used to get ~29.8fc out of the box on iris 0 which is 5% more than now at 315 hours. 5% more would put the -15 iris right at 1001 lumens by my measurement when my bulb was new.
Which device is this? NX5? NX9? To me, those numbers are a bit disappointing. The iris just isn't very effective. Previous generations you could get -15 down to like half that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,809 Posts
Which device is this? NX5? NX9? To me, those numbers are a bit disappointing. The iris just isn't very effective. Previous generations you could get -15 down to like half that.
My NX5

This is high bulb though. It would be decently lower in low bulb.

I don't know why I would want or need lower. I can easily calibrate my SDR to 16fL with this iris in low bulb.

The NX7 and NX9 will go lower as they are using 2 iris, but again If I am calibrating to 16fL why would I need lower than that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,815 Posts
Finally measured this tonight after a watching session.

With 315 hours on my bulb, all iris groups calibrated with autocal and Spyder5 / i1 Pro 2.

Measured with this meter up against the center of the screen:

https://aemc.com/products/environmental-testers/lightmeter-CA813

Code:
iris    fc      lumens
0	28.4	1549
-1	28.3	1543
-2	28	1527
-3	27	1473
-4	26.8	1462
-5	26.3	1434
-6	26	1418
-7	25.4	1385
-8	25.1	1369
-9	24.1	1314
-10	23.8	1298
-11	22.8	1244
-12	22.9	1249
-13	21.8	1189
-14	19.8	1080
-15	17.5	954
I would say that these are also about 5% low from a new bulb as I used to get ~29.8fc out of the box on iris 0 which is 5% more than now at 315 hours. 5% more would put the -15 iris right at 1001 lumens by my measurement when my bulb was new.
The 650 to 700 lumen number is for -15, low lamp and at short throw. We were talking minimum number you can get the projector down to. Short throw, because you still want max available lumens for HDR, so that you can close down the iris gaining contrast and have longer lamp life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,259 Posts
The 650 to 700 lumen number is for -15, low lamp and at short throw. We were talking minimum number you can get the projector down to. Short throw, because you still want max available lumens for HDR, so that you can close down the iris gaining contrast and have longer lamp life.
I compared it to my rs400 when I had it. It was 450 lumens on low at -15 and 750 on high at -15. My max calibrated on high was 1550. About 200 more lumens at -15 than my rs400, which is impressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,809 Posts
The 650 to 700 lumen number is for -15, low lamp and at short throw. We were talking minimum number you can get the projector down to. Short throw, because you still want max available lumens for HDR, so that you can close down the iris gaining contrast and have longer lamp life.
Yeah I am at closest throw.

I only measured iris 0 on low, but it was 29% lower than high.

So that would put my -15 currently at 677 lumens, or approximately 710 with a new bulb in low bulb.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,209 Posts
Anybody know what voltage DLP uses when testing cables? I did not see anything listed. I know in the past, many cables were rated for 18Gbps, but when connected to AVR's, could not pass 18Gbps. The cables passed because the testing procedure used a computer to send the various signals and the voltage was higher. Surely that practice does not continue today?

Ive sent them an email and asked. Curious to know myself
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
26,682 Posts
Interesting read. The price is crazy for sure. but most of the features they talked about are on the other Fiber cables of today. I am all for spending big money, I mean why are we all in this thread? lol. The newer updated Fiber cables use less power which means no external power source, which is a benefit.

I am no HDMI genius, I am learning a TON as time goes on. I was looking at https://www.monoprice.com/product?c_id=301&cp_id=30101&cs_id=3010101&p_id=38638&seq=1&format=2 and I think this would be a great price for a Fiber cable. Even the ones @Cleveland Plasma suggested on Amazon are good and better priced, but i am kind of bias towards Monoprice due to their history.
I noticed that the you need to pull gently on the Fiber Optic cables when fishing, I kinda felt a stretch and I know they are not built like stretch on the Fantastic 4 :D
 

·
Registered
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | B&W 802D3, HTM1D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
8,435 Posts
I compared it to my rs400 when I had it. It was 450 lumens on low at -15 and 750 on high at -15. My max calibrated on high was 1550. About 200 more lumens at -15 than my rs400, which is impressive.
Yea, I think perhaps this is why the dynamic iris is more effective on the previous generation as well.
 
25761 - 25780 of 29535 Posts
Top