AVS Forum banner

621 - 640 of 744 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
500 Posts
I will be putting the Lumagen against a Pro very soon.

And not only will I be sitting on my sofa, I am going to pixel peep both and post what they are really doing close up.

People need to understand that the tone mapping has not been TOUCHED in over one year, it was put on hold so the Envy GUI and such could be implemented, word is, that is very nearly finally done and Mathias will be back on board the tone mapping, there is a list of things we are going to look at. Its no surpise the Lumagen in that time has caught right up. Well done to them! But dont think that MadVR is about to lie down on the railroad tracks.
DTM is not the only place that Envy appears behind.

The scope of the comparison tends to focus on scaling and DTM, but I submit that company viability both financially and operationally should be included. That it has taken so long for Envy to release product may or may not indicate issues relative thereto, but it warrants consideration.

Furthermore, cost of each unit is real, and factors into relative valuations.

The Lumagen team has proven its business and technical prowess long term, while Envy is just getting started as a business. Of course, Envy, via madVR, has established long term technical prowess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,577 Posts
actually so far it is looking better because of the performance comparisons to the extreme. If twice the cost isn’t manifesting in pretty substantial differences in direct comparisons with the extreme, who is even thinking about the pro!
For tone mapping and scaling and normal sharpening / enhancements the Pro is the equal of the Extreme. As for the comparisons here in Europe they were considered significant in a number of comparisons but then these people do not post here as not everybody feels the need to post on a forum and/or his English skills may prevent posting.

As far as to what is considered significant and what isn't this is I guess subjective anyway. Today I had somebody over and we made a comparison between an NX9 and an NX7 and differences with test patterns and close to the screen were VERY visible especially towards the edges of the screen due to the superior lens of the NX9 but not so much with moving video of even the best demo content at about one screen width away and yet there are people who buy the NX9 despite its much higher price.

Comparing the Envy and the Lumagen one could find more substantial differences between the Envy Pro and the Radiance Pro than what we saw with the two JVC in certain areas but the question is what is important to the customer and what is considered inconsequential.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,818 Posts
DTM is not the only place that Envy appears behind.
Which is why I said I am going to pixel peep. Have already seen close up images with the Lumagens new up-scaling. But will reserve any comment for when I carry out the comparisons, not just that, I will upload almost lossless video capture of both machines for people to download and watch to see what they are both doing with a source scene too. As far as I know that has never been done before.

Furthermore, cost of each unit is real, and factors into relative valuations.
Yeah and doubly why I think it will be interesting to look at the PRO vs the Lumagen because they are close to the same price.

The scope of the comparison tends to focus on scaling and DTM, but I submit that company viability both financially and operationally should be included. That it has taken so long for Envy to release product may or may not indicate issues relative thereto, but it warrants consideration.

The Lumagen team has proven its business and technical prowess long term, while Envy is just getting started as a business. Of course, Envy, via madVR, has established long term technical prowess.
Understood, but I just simply dont care about this. Not going to apologize but comments like this have no place in a performance analysis thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,818 Posts
For tone mapping and scaling and normal sharpening / enhancements the Pro is the equal of the Extreme. As for the comparisons here in Europe they were considered significant in a number of comparisons but then these people do not post here as not everybody feels the need to post on a forum and/or his English skills may prevent posting.

As far as to what is considered significant and what isn't this is I guess subjective anyway. Today I had somebody over and we made a comparison between an NX9 and an NX7 and differences with test patterns and close to the screen were VERY visible especially towards the edges of the screen due to the superior lens of the NX9 but not so much with moving video of even the best demo content at about one screen width away and yet there are people who buy the NX9 despite its much higher price.

Comparing the Envy and the Lumagen one could find more substantial differences between the Envy Pro and the Radiance Pro than what we saw with the two JVC in certain areas but the question is what is important to the customer and what is considered inconsequential.
Love to hear more?? What was compared and what was the result? Which was significant etc?

Very interested in any comparisons! Got a link to the foreign threads? Many of us would like to read them regardless, Google translate does work very well.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
500 Posts
.
That it has taken so long for Envy to release product may or may not indicate issues relative thereto, but it warrants consideration.

Furthermore, cost of each unit is real, and factors into relative valuations.

The Lumagen team has proven its business and technical prowess long term, while Envy is just getting started as a business. Of course, Envy, via madVR, has established long term technical prowess.
Understood, but I just simply dont care about this. Not going to apologize but comments like this have no place in a performance analysis thread.
Consider us thoroughly disagreed.

That they are commercial products of significant entry price, and by necessity dynamic in order to stay pertinent technically, the business side is as important as any factor. Oppo would be exhibit A in demonstration of this point.
 

·
aka jfinnie
Joined
·
4,448 Posts
Oppo would be exhibit A in demonstration of this point.
It's a pretty crappy exhibit and I'm not sure the point you're making... Those players are long out of production, with no software updates forever, and they're STILL going up in value!?! I bought one for a friend abroad just as they were discontinuing them, I wish I'd picked up 5 more for myself while I was at it...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
500 Posts
It's a pretty crappy exhibit and I'm not sure the point you're making... Those players are long out of production, with no software updates forever, and they're STILL going up in value!?! I bought one for a friend abroad just as they were discontinuing them, I wish I'd picked up 5 more for myself while I was at it...
My logic was that a company that cannot stay in business cannot update their product. Were Oppo’s functionality cease to suffice because of changes to AV developments, the value of surviving units would plummet.

As far as support for Oppo, is any available?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,518 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,818 Posts
Consider us thoroughly disagreed.

That they are commercial products of significant entry price, and by necessity dynamic in order to stay pertinent technically, the business side is as important as any factor. Oppo would be exhibit A in demonstration of this point.
Perfectly fine to disagree.

Since you use Oppo as an example, then by that argument, nobody should ever recommend, nor talk about Oppo since they are out of business specific to disc players, yet everybody talks about them. My point remains, I simply am not interested in that side of things, this position is unique to only me. I am interested in what performance both units have, not what their business structure is like, nor the fact that one is established and one is new, how is that ever fair to hold against somebody?
 

·
aka jfinnie
Joined
·
4,448 Posts
My logic was that a company that cannot stay in business cannot update their product. Were Oppo’s functionality cease to suffice because of changes to AV developments, the value surviving units would plummet.

As far as support for Oppo, is any available?
This is getting OT, but they're nothing alike. OPPO made a strategic decision that the resources deployed into that narrow market were better off spent elsewhere, that it was a distraction from their engineering. They're a massive outfit in China. They did decide to put out an update I think just after they shuttered the player operation, and I'm not sure their player really needs any other update, so who cares. But it's not related to the argument you were making.

Anyway, it's an OT distraction. I do understand the original argument you are making about the commercials around each business. I think it is legitimate for folk wanting to make technical evaluations of the differences between the product not to want to get dragged into that discussion, just like it's legitimate for folk who want to discuss it to discuss it. This isn't a nanny state, and I think in a comparison thread it's reasonable to compare all aspects of a product.

For what it is worth, I don't personally read anything into it having taken a lot longer than was expected for them to get product out the door than that engineering stuff with small teams takes time and is hard. I don't think it speaks anything directly for their business viability (though perhaps a little for inexperience in the public discussion so ahead of time - but I'm sure you could spin that might not have been a complete downside either all factors considered).

Anyway, I hope it all stays civilised in here as personally I find there's nothing more annoying than the constant thread culls the subject of discussion of these two products seems to produce.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
500 Posts
It appears that my usage of Oppo as an example of a company with great products and happy customers but still went out of business failed to make a useful point. It wasn’t important enough to warrant continued attempts to clarify.

My background as a sales engineer (retired) for multiple leading information technology manufacturers causes me to consider finances and business practices in product comparisons. I’ve seen many a great product line suffer in spite of superb technology, and delayed product releases is a common tell.

It’s not important to me for anyone to agree, and if this thread community doesn’t care to have it included, then it can end here as a discussion point. But it’s a real consideration, and only time will tell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,818 Posts
This is getting OT, but they're nothing alike. OPPO made a strategic decision that the resources deployed into that narrow market were better off spent elsewhere, that it was a distraction from their engineering. They're a massive outfit in China. They did decide to put out an update I think just after they shuttered the player operation, and I'm not sure their player really needs any other update, so who cares. But it's not related to the argument you were making.

Anyway, it's an OT distraction. I do understand the original argument you are making about the commercials around each business. I think it is legitimate for folk wanting to make technical evaluations of the differences between the product not to want to get dragged into that discussion, just like it's legitimate for folk who want to discuss it to discuss it. This isn't a nanny state, and I think in a comparison thread it's reasonable to compare all aspects of a product.

For what it is worth, I don't personally read anything into it having taken a lot longer than was expected for them to get product out the door than that engineering stuff with small teams takes time and is hard. I don't think it speaks anything directly for their business viability (though perhaps a little for inexperience in the public discussion so ahead of time - but I'm sure you could spin that might not have been a complete downside either all factors considered).

Anyway, I hope it all stays civilised in here as personally I find there's nothing more annoying than the constant thread culls the subject of discussion of these two products seems to produce.
Thank you for more elegantly explaining my headspace. I just dont care to get into the business side of the product and how long its taken, I couldn't care less. I will be focusing on the boxes I will have in front of me at the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,577 Posts
Love to hear more?? What was compared and what was the result? Which was significant etc?

Very interested in any comparisons! Got a link to the foreign threads? Many of us would like to read them regardless, Google translate does work very well.
It was rather simple stuff - people getting an Envy for testing and comparing to a Lumagen and keeping the Envy or looking at both at a dealer or at home.

I did not want to bring examples up as the people in question do not post here and all of that was before the last Lumagen update except for one comparison that I did myself with a customer where I suggested to wait for the latest update to see if that would change prior decisions.

I remember two DTM comparisons from two German speaking forums but I can only find one from April and I think that predates some tone mapping improvements in the Lumagen:

Here W.Mayer writes about the Envy scaling:

There were others from France and Italy over the last 6 months but I did not note those down as I have my own comparison results that I base my opinion on and some of these posts and discussions have been on facebook that I find less than perfect for saving things for posterity. And even if I did put more stock in other people's findings these processors are a work in progress and I always recommend to people to see for themselves to get a more complete understanding of the often surprising differences between two products from the same category, this also goes for projectors.

If they do that it may turn out that they happen to like non-linear stretching more than a proper picture geometry and also a bit additional pop with their HDR content even though it may look a bit less like a reference monitor than if different settings were chosen. Same as many people liking a sharpened picture which has mostly to do with individual taste and very little with how a picture is intended to look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,945 Posts
It appears that my usage of Oppo as an example of a company with great products and happy customers but still went out of business failed to make a useful point.
As has been previously pointed out: Oppo did NOT go out of business. Their corporate plan presumably shifted away from the less lucrative, more niche market of disc spinners as streaming has made physical media less and less relevant. They currently appear to be one of the largest cell phone manufacturers in the global market place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Karl Maga

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,704 Posts
I will be putting the Lumagen against a Pro very soon.

And not only will I be sitting on my sofa, I am going to pixel peep both and post what they are really doing close up.

People need to understand that the tone mapping has not been TOUCHED in over one year, it was put on hold so the Envy GUI and such could be implemented, word is, that is very nearly finally done and Mathias will be back on board the tone mapping, there is a list of things we are going to look at. Its no surpise the Lumagen in that time has caught right up. Well done to them! But dont think that MadVR is about to lie down on the railroad tracks.
Along with pixel peeping still images, be sure and look at video in motion. I know that Mathias does not agree, but take a look yourself and then judge if there is any merit to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,818 Posts
Along with pixel peeping still images, be sure and look at video in motion. I know that Mathias does not agree, but take a look yourself and then judge if there is any merit to it.
Sure, I said I will also post captured video here so others can view also.

But as they say with things like convergence errors, while you may not be able to see them from your seat if they are there they are a problem.

So, I don't accept that only video in motion from the chair is the way to look at this. I do not see artefacts from madvr at the moment, I see them on NVIDIA shield quite badly, while paused looks good on the shields version of AI upscaling. So I get the train of thought, but I don't think there is going to be a problem here.

In fact what is missing from the comparison so far is very precisely the lack of pixel peeping!

I could expand on this more with screenshots I've been sent, but I am going to do my own and also explain that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,577 Posts
Stills can also serve to illustrate why one is seeing differences in motion. Together with a proper explanation of what has been seen issues can be illustrated a lot easier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,979 Posts
Along with pixel peeping still images, be sure and look at video in motion. I know that Mathias does not agree, but take a look yourself and then judge if there is any merit to it.
@ Mike, there seems to be a misunderstanding here. When the 2 of us discussed this topic previously, you posted in a way that read to me as if you were saying that comparing image quality should only be done with moving images, and not with still frames. And I replied by pointing you to the fact that scientists and researchers world wide today actually compare video upscaling quality primarily by measuring and comparing single ("still") frames with well-known metrics such as PSNR and SSIM. Which is certainly a worthwhile fact to mention?

But I fully agree with you and Javs that comparing image quality in motion is important, as well. I'm a fan of comparing "everything". Artificial test patterns, still photos and movie content. In still frames using pixel peeping and in motion. From seating distance and with the nose pressed to the screen. Personally, I use pixel peeping in screenshots as my primary testing & comparison & development method, which is what scientists and researchers seem to do, as well. The reason for this preference is that it makes things more objective. You just can't cheat that easily on still frames. Most artifacts like e.g. ringing and aliasing become easily visible, which can be missed by the inexperienced eye in motion. Plus, you can switch back & forth between 2 comparison images in the blink of an eye (which makes even small differences visible), while when you compare motion sequences, you need to rely on short term visual memory. But as I said, I like to test in motion, as well, to get the "full picture", and to make sure that there are no motion artifacts etc.

There are certain artifacts that are way more visible in motion, as well. E.g. if you have banding, often in a fade-to-black the bands are moving very visibly, which makes the banding stick out like a sore thumb, while in still frames it can be much less obvious. Or if there's an upscaling algo which tries to hallucinate texture detail, that could look great in stills but could potentially look terrible in motion. So testing in motion is definitely helpful/useful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,818 Posts
The NVIDIA Shield definitely hallucinates texture detail that's such an apt term LOL.

It's terrible. I don't know what drugs they are on over there, it looks ok in still, but when it moves it's got crazy shimmering artefacts. I can't believe a lot of the 'internet' think it's amazing. I really had high hopes for that box but it's been pretty disappointing.
 

·
aka jfinnie
Joined
·
4,448 Posts
The NVIDIA Shield definitely hallucinates texture detail that's such an apt term LOL.

It's terrible. I don't know what drugs they are on over there, it looks ok in still, but when it moves it's got crazy shimmering artefacts. I can't believe a lot of the 'internet' think it's amazing. I really had high hopes for that box but it's been pretty disappointing.
I also had really high hopes for it, but yeah, it lasted about 2 minutes. Unfortunately much like TV torch mode, it seems this is what it takes to wow Joe Public, a ridiculous exaggeration of reality that you can't actually live with for more than a minute if you've actually seen something properly set up before..
At least the plain "Enhanced" mode is reasonable.

Of everything I've got hooked up at the moment, the Shield also has by far and away the worst de-interlacer I've seen in years (at least when used via KODI - might try it with another player at some point). Not that I really watch much interlaced content (was being tortured with some Disney straight-to-DVD cack by my lad) but still...
 
621 - 640 of 744 Posts
Top