[GeorgeAB]

You are in the wrong section of the forum if you want to copy or share display menu settings. Try the display owners section that corresponds to your model. Copying settings is NOT calibration. This is the 'Display Calibration' section of the forum. All that such foolishness will get you is a TV picture that might look a little like someone else's TV (which you have likely never seen). Then again, it might not look anything at all like theirs. How do you know your viewing environment conditions will be identical? Will you also insist that they used the same DVD player that had its picture options menu set the same as yours? Some basic "picture modes" may be superior on certain displays. These can be used in common for better performance, but actual picture adjustment values can vary significantly.


Electronic component tolerances used in consumer TVs and source components are very loose and imprecise (+/- 10% or worse). Because these tolerances are so imprecise, two samples of TV can come off the same assembly line and require very different picture settings to look near the same.


I vividly experienced this last year when I was called in as an image quality analysis consultant for one of the largest national cable TV companies. They were doing a research project, using three new higher-end Panasonic 50" plasmas of the same model, and set up in ideal viewing conditions. Their engineers had gone over the picture settings on each display and set the menu items all identically. Two of the plasmas looked nearly like each other (still not identical), but the third one obviously looked quite different.


Widely respected professional calibrators, who have aligned thousands of consumer and professional displays in their careers, agree on this point [example: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post16121112 ]. The only way to reliably attain a more accurate image from any consumer display is to use reference test signals, NOT another display's settings. At minimum, use a calibration DVD on YOUR player, to adjust YOUR television, follow the tutorial instructions, set the picture controls for YOUR viewing environment conditions, and learn something from the experience. The simplest remedy is to hire a professional. Excellence in any endeavor requires extra effort. Copying others' work on another device is a fool's errand, with no assurance of improvement.


Best regards and beautiful pictures,

G. Alan Brown, President

CinemaQuest, Inc.

A Lion AV Consultants Affiliate


"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

 

[DroptheRemote]

Please make this thread a sticky.

 

[jdoostil]

amen!!

 

[creatine64]

great info and I agree 100%, my question though was there something that provoked this post or more of an FYI to the people reading this forum?

 

[joemama127]

I agree George, and also tell people the same thing about copying others settings however....I also tell them that using someone elses calibrated settings for the same make/model can be a good starting point for calibration, and certainly better than leaving a set in showroom torch mode.

 

[Zues]

I agree copying settings is not ideal as the source plays a part. But i don't think one should just call for help for a calibration, if you are a enthusiest. You should learn to know what a accurate picture looks like. It's not that hard, most photos on the internet are very accurate to get a idea. Most top brand tv's come pretty accurate and give you plenty of controls to achieve a top level picture. Learn to know yourself i say or you will forever be trusting someone else to tell you it's accurate.

 

[GeorgeAB]



Quote:
my question though was there something that provoked this post....?

This thread is my feeble attempt at possibly steering people who want to swap settings to the proper section of the forum. The display calibration section has been recently littered with such confused posters. I was motivated to promote a bit of housekeeping so this section could remain better focused and rewarding for folks who are serious about display calibration.

 

[mlaun]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Zues /forum/post/14440174


I agree copying settings is not ideal as the source plays a part. But i don't think one should just call for help for a calibration, if you are a enthusiest. You should learn to know what a accurate picture looks like. It's not that hard, most photos on the internet are very accurate to get a idea. Most top brand tv's come pretty accurate and give you plenty of controls to achieve a top level picture. Learn to know yourself i say or you will forever be trusting someone else to tell you it's accurate.

So looking at pictures over the internet with a computer monitor (that is most likely desperatly in need of calibration) is going to help you adjust your TV???


Sorry, I don't understand the logic of that, or i'm totaly misunderstanding you.


As to most major brand TV's being comming pretty accurate out of the BOX?? Sorry again, on which continant is this happening??? Here in europe they are way Off.

 

[Doug Blackburn]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Zues /forum/post/14440174


I agree copying settings is not ideal as the source plays a part.

This implies that the video displays might all be the same - that's absolutely NOT the case. I have see every variation you could imagine... some brands/models are always different from one another even in the basic controls. Other brands/models may be pretty close on 3 or 4 settings (like contrast, brightness, color, tint, sharpness), but completely different on other settings (grayscale, gamma, color management, etc.).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zues /forum/post/14440174


But i don't think one should just call for help for a calibration, if you are a enthusiest. You should learn to know what a accurate picture looks like. It's not that hard, most photos on the internet are very accurate to get a idea.

Uh... most photos on the internet are completely messed up because there are no standards for color online. Photos you take with your own digital camera are not even accurate as different manufacturers tune their cameras to make images look prettier than real life (though there may be settings on some cameras that allow more accuracy). Accurate color online requires: 1) accurate original images with color management; 2) internet browser with color management (Firefox 3.X has this capability but it only works if condition #1 is met and this is VERY rare at this point); 3) the video display on your laptop or desktop PC has to be accurate and calibrated... and not calibrated by eye, calibrated with instrumentation.


It's EXTREMELY rare to find a situation where 1, 2, and 3 above are all "in play".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zues /forum/post/14440174


Most top brand tv's come pretty accurate and give you plenty of controls to achieve a top level picture. Learn to know yourself i say or you will forever be trusting someone else to tell you it's accurate.

I guess your definition of "pretty accurate" and mine are very different. In my experience, most "top brand" TVs come with errors or shortcomings (like Gamma lower than ideal, or red push, or inaccurate primaries/secondaries) with no adjustments at all to fix the problem(s). It is the exceptional video display that comes with all the adjustments needed to make the picture "ideal". Right now, current Samsung displays have the best set of adjustments available in displays less than $7500 or so. But as good/complete as the Samsung display controls are, they still lack 10- or 11-step gray scale adjustments with adjustable luminance for each step (for perfect Gamma control).

 

[GeorgeAB]

Zues,


What is the significance of your screen/user name?

 

[GeorgeAB]

Zues,


Cat got your tongue (or keyboard)?

 

[D-6500]



Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeAB /forum/post/14452940


Zues,


Cat got your tongue (or keyboard)?

Pick on my handle, George. At least his is not a misconstrued interpretation of a video calibration standard! And I've learned to be self-defacating about my handle since AVS forum control panel provides no means to change it.

 

[Ratman]



Quote:
Originally Posted by D-6500 /forum/post/14453730


And I've learned to be self-defacating about my handle.

LOL!

Did you mean self-defecating or self-deprecating?

 

[GeorgeAB]

It's amazing to me how quickly some contributions in this forum can degenerate a constructive discussion into such a misdirected, shallow and juvenile direction. Such 'drive by' posts consistently make a spectacle of ignorance, immaturity, and only serve to diminish the credibility of their source. This kind of clueless masochism is embarrassing at best and deeply troubling at worst. I started this thread to encourage clarity and precision in the display calibration portion of the forum. Please help keep it on track.

 

[Ratman]

That can and will happen... IMO, you helped this along.

It's a shame. Your opening post should've been made a sticky and locked from further postings. It's really not a 'discussion' per se, but good advice that needs no rebuttle.


Maybe the thread can be cleaned up, made a sticky and locked. Zues can respond to your question via PM.

 

[GeorgeAB]

Good points.

 

[D-6500]



Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeAB /forum/post/14454212


It's amazing to me how quickly some contributions in this forum can degenerate a constructive discussion into such a misdirected, shallow and juvenile direction. Such 'drive by' posts consistently make a spectacle of ignorance, immaturity, and only serve to diminish the credibility of their source. This kind of clueless masochism is embarrassing at best and deeply troubling at worst. I started this thread to encourage clarity and precision in the display calibration portion of the forum. Please help keep it on track.

Lighten up a little! Kirk had the same problem on board Enterprise with his science officer - you know who. That Vulcan, with the brains of 10 humans, simply could not deal with Terran humor or colloquialisms. And yes, I meant self-depracating. If you hadn't been so persistent in determining the origin of Zues's handle, we wouldn't be on this tangent. It is, I must concur, most illogical . . .

 

[GeorgeAB]



Quote:
lighten up a little!

ok.

 

[Zues]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn /forum/post/14443114


This implies that the video displays might all be the same - that's absolutely NOT the case. I have see every variation you could imagine... some brands/models are always different from one another even in the basic controls. Other brands/models may be pretty close on 3 or 4 settings (like contrast, brightness, color, tint, sharpness), but completely different on other settings (grayscale, gamma, color management, etc.).





Uh... most photos on the internet are completely messed up because there are no standards for color online. Photos you take with your own digital camera are not even accurate as different manufacturers tune their cameras to make images look prettier than real life (though there may be settings on some cameras that allow more accuracy). Accurate color online requires: 1) accurate original images with color management; 2) internet browser with color management (Firefox 3.X has this capability but it only works if condition #1 is met and this is VERY rare at this point); 3) the video display on your laptop or desktop PC has to be accurate and calibrated... and not calibrated by eye, calibrated with instrumentation.


It's EXTREMELY rare to find a situation where 1, 2, and 3 above are all "in play".




I guess your definition of "pretty accurate" and mine are very different. In my experience, most "top brand" TVs come with errors or shortcomings (like Gamma lower than ideal, or red push, or inaccurate primaries/secondaries) with no adjustments at all to fix the problem(s). It is the exceptional video display that comes with all the adjustments needed to make the picture "ideal". Right now, current Samsung displays have the best set of adjustments available in displays less than $7500 or so. But as good/complete as the Samsung display controls are, they still lack 10- or 11-step gray scale adjustments with adjustable luminance for each step (for perfect Gamma control).

IMO most top brands are pretty accurate, sonyXBR-pioneer elite.

I think Sony is the most accurate. Pioneer is pretty accurate but grayscale needs alot of attention. Samsung? Well i don't think they can match sony even if it has more controls, i could be wrong. I guess i just dont feel given the same access to the same controls that nobody could noticeably best what i could do by eye. I'll put my non-calibrated d65 factory crt monitor up against any dispaly for grayscale-color temp accuracy. If i can get the image to match that in many demanding scenes i doubt someone could do better with just instrumentation-test patterns etc. The only way i see paying someone to calibrate my display is if i was not happy and known service menu adjustments needed to be made and i was not comfortable venturing in there. As far as adjusting user menu controls with top brand tv's, i bet i come closer using a reference crt monitor and scrutinizing critical scenes then just using tools and test patterns.

 

[Zues]



Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeAB /forum/post/14452940


Zues,


Cat got your tongue (or keyboard)?

Hehe no. I'm not saying hiring a professional is not worth it. I know if i had a crt front projector, it would be well worth it. But even then many love tinkering with there stuff and would not let anyone touch it. But top brand tv's and projectors i don't think i'm wrong when most enthusiests would be very happy calibrating it themselves. Not just hiring someone and them telling you it's accurate. It's not rocket science or voodoo. All you can do is slightly improve what the manufacturer gave you. And contrary to popular belief someone could really mess it up if they don't know what they are doing. I doubt no two calibrators do the same work, and their settings would differ on the same display.