AVS Forum banner

1561 - 1580 of 3111 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,617 Posts
To me it seems that actually HDR kills the black levels.
Projectors have a fixed black floor that is restricted by the lower Native On/Off and the peak white.

I'm not sure how this looks at 40 fL or whatever, but I can guess and it's probably not great.

HDR cannot solve this problem, as HDR increases the range of everything just above the floor up to the peak white being brighter.
That doesn't change the actual contrast ratio for bottoming things out, that just makes the intrascene contrast higher in certain scenes from the adaptive gamma.

It is only because of silly high contrast ratios with oLED that some TV's can somewhat overcome the issue.
Properly set up, 4K and HDR at 45 foot lamberts looks great. Not everything looks to the eye that much brighter than at 34 foot lamberts. It's mostly highlights and certain parts of the picture ) depending on the scene and movie ). The Matrix looked excellent at 45+ foot lamberts. And my wife has not once complained that it's too bright !
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,928 Posts
Speaking of JVC 4500 & Sony 5000 Laser projectors ...

I personally want to see is there going to be a new Model/Series of either ???
And if so the pricing of them ???


I will spend the monies necessary to get what to me is the Higher-End unit but I want to do it Only-1-Time.


To me a $35K to say $60K MSRP is a heck of a lot of money for either.


So, the questions that faces me are, New Series JVC4500 and maybe a New Sony 5000 ???
If so then what can either actually be purchased for ???
I'm not an MSRP person, period !!!


I have a Runco VX-11D and it was a $30K US Dollar unit MSRP.
No I did not pay the MSRP as an example.


Some of my working career was in sales so I'm very aware of Mark-Ups.


So, wait on CEDA and what takes place I surely will and if I have to wait again until CEDA for 2019 Next-Year I will.
I've learned over the years to make myself have, Patience when making a Final-Decision on something costing what these Laser projectors do.


Terry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,491 Posts
Properly set up, 4K and HDR at 45 foot lamberts looks great. Not everything looks to the eye that much brighter than at 34 foot lamberts. It's mostly highlights and certain parts of the picture ) depending on the scene and movie ). The Matrix looked excellent at 45+ foot lamberts. And my wife has not once complained that it's too bright !
What some people don't realize with HDR: it's not about a blinding eye experience. You need the extra nits to maintain a sufficient APL while allowing for specular highlights and greater range. 45 ftl HDR is not the same as 45 ftl SDR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,228 Posts
I am not sure, but it will likely be out of my budget considering lamp costs + projector cost.
I could look at a used or refurb Sony 285, but not sure I want to go that route without lens memory.
That’s another one of my issues. I am also switching to an AT screen and don’t know whether to go from my 120 Diag to a 130 16x9 or a135 2.35:1. My old Panny 7000 has lens memory but the Sony does not. I am not choosing a screen until after the. Ew announcements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,617 Posts
What some people don't realize with HDR: it's not about a blinding eye experience. You need the extra nits to maintain a sufficient APL while allowing for specular highlights and greater range. 45 ftl HDR is not the same as 45 ftl SDR.
It really just makes it look more balanced, or dare I say more like watching a flat panel TV. In fact, watching The Revenant and Deadpool a couple of weeks ago, I marveled at how far things have come from my RS600 / gamma D / Samsung 4K player fiasco at the very dawn of the 4K Blu-ray era. Everything looked too dark, and one needed an HD Fury and Panny UB900, SDR work arounds etc. ( prior to the custom gamma curves being perfected ). 4K rocks now - especially at 45 foot lamberts or more ! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,617 Posts
I personally want to see is there going to be a new Model/Series of either ???
And if so the pricing of them ???


I will spend the monies necessary to get what to me is the Higher-End unit but I want to do it Only-1-Time.


To me a $35K to say $60K MSRP is a heck of a lot of money for either.


So, the questions that faces me are, New Series JVC4500 and maybe a New Sony 5000 ???
If so then what can either actually be purchased for ???
I'm not an MSRP person, period !!!


I have a Runco VX-11D and it was a $30K US Dollar unit MSRP.
No I did not pay the MSRP as an example.


Some of my working career was in sales so I'm very aware of Mark-Ups.


So, wait on CEDA and what takes place I surely will and if I have to wait again until CEDA for 2019 Next-Year I will.
I've learned over the years to make myself have, Patience when making a Final-Decision on something costing what these Laser projectors do.


Terry
I'll wager neither one gets upgraded this year. And beware the " upgrade " that's mostly a marketing department pipe dream, with only minor actual improvements. Plus, I'd rather buy a projector that has been out a couple of years and had the bugs and issues resolved, than a brand new model with unknown firmware issues to be addressed. Just like cars Terry - I like to buy last years model that's been tested and dialed in performance wise.

Of course when you work in the industry, you are expected to be a test pilot. When you are an end user / consumer - get the de-bugged model that's been out for a while !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,349 Posts
That is great to hear! I'm leaning heavily toward buying the UB820 as I need to replace my cheap UHD player. Does the 820 still have the same excellent upscaling for blu ray like the 900 has?
yes it does, everything I have seen so far is at parity or better than the UB900 except the included remote control.
 

·
Registered
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
8,988 Posts
I respect your judgments but there are a few caveats.

You watch a lot of sci-fi( I do too)

+

You have compared the very best of the e-shift line(the 640es) with frankly a mid-range Sony native 4K device.

If you compared your 640es(the best of the e-shifters) with the best of the native Sony 4k 's......the 5000es (I know that is an unfair financial comparison.....but still a viable technical one)...or the Z1 you might be singing to a different tune.

There is greater sharpness and then there is absolute clarity(when fed with the right material).

Your rs640 is probably sharper than my rs600(but given Jav's experience between his rs620 being better than a 640 maybe that is not the case) but i have no doubt that my 1000es is sharper than your 675es.

So you have to compare the best against the best.

If you had a Z1 side by side with your 640.....trust me.....you will be watching movies and gaming on it:)
My RS640 is sharper than my RS500 so it's probably a very good sample.

I wish I had an 1100ES to be honest. I don't care at all about HDR (I just tone map everything) and the sharper lens would be perfect for my use. The Z1/RS4500 I ruled out after viewing one locally. Although getting one of these and clamping down the iris might help, but it's not going to be in the same league as my RS640. The blacks just aren't there and I'm not spending that kind of money on a projector that would be only in my room until something with better blacks shows up. Same reason I ruled out the 885ES (although I now wish I did get this instead of the 675ES for games as it' would make those pop much better). The 5000ES probably looks better but again, its got way more lumens and probably even worse blacks than my 675ES. The 5000ES contrast isn't really that great and when you add so much more light to the mix, you're just screwed when you try to display the color black. I don't think that's going to solve the problem either. Quite honestly, I won't own anything that shows grey for black. I have owned all pioneer elite plasma TVs before my projector and am use to very deep blacks. The JVC was the only projector that came close in this regard. I'm just out on grey star fields. When I see that I want to go barf.

My RS640 is staying put until a true 4K projector comes out that can generate black when needed not grey. One does not exist today.
 

·
Registered
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
8,988 Posts
It is not optimizing each pixel, it is sharpening it. You can read marketing speak all day. It isn't like the projector has a database of every movie ever made and knows how to optimize for it. Turn RC off, the image is obviously softened SIGNIFICANTLY. A native 4K projector with a native 4K test pattern should not soften like that with a native signal, it should look rock solid with clearly defined pixels. You SHOULD NOT have to turn on any "enhancement" features to make the pixels look sharp. Sharpening is done by increasing the high frequency information near an object to produce local contrast (white edges around dark objects) so that our eyes think they are sharper than they really are. This is exactly what RC is doing. Now it may do it with less artifacts than other solutions when used judiciously, but a properly designed 4K projector shouldn't need it to pass a simple test pattern.
None of this to me matters *at all*. I don't care how a projector manages to look sharp. I don't care how a projector *should* display a 4K test pattern with no firmware assist. I don't care if a projector should be able to display something without enhancements on or not. I just don't care - it doesn't matter to anyone *using* the projector. Instead, I want to turn on the projector and use all of its features to get the best picture I can get. If the firmware provides some bit of magic to give a better sharper image at seating distance without negatives, then that should be used. Reality creation does that.

The facts are that reality creation is almost magic. It adds some sharpness that's nothing like any other sharpening filters I've ever seen. I see tons more detail and much better focus on all content with no artifacts at all. In addition, it also seems to clean up some of the video compression noise. It's pure magic. Now, if I was doing a review of the capabilities of the projector, I'd definitely turn that off to do some comparisons on the hardware in the device. But the device also comes with firmware that runs it, and that firmware includes the magical reality creation. The final product is the combination of the hardware and the firmware. So when I actually go to use the device, that stuff gets turned on. I don't cripple it by turning that off because the lens *should* be ok without it. That's pure crazy talk. Whether or not it *should* be needed is absolutely irrelevant. The picture is much improved when it's on.

A shootout is not a review or analysis of only hardware. It's a comparison of the completed product at its best against another completed product at its best. Therefore, if I were doing a shootout, it would for sure be on. Anyone that knows Sonys and cares about having a fair shootout would know this and have it on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,799 Posts
The JVC DI does a very good job in Mad Max, there's quite a few FTB in the movie and they hold long enough for it to full clamp giving a great perception of full blackout in the room during the transition. Eye piercing colors with popping highlights then boom, lights out - very cool movie to demo in a velvet pit.

If there is a 4K lamp version coming out, I hope they keep the dual iris.
I watched PREDATOR last night in UHD and the opening scene where the spaceship jettisons the pod to earth was stunning INKY black with the DI fully shut down, then opening to -0 for the very next scenes...

I love the DI in the JVC's.

What a film.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,214 Posts
None of this to me matters *at all*. I don't care how a projector manages to look sharp. I don't care how a projector *should* display a 4K test pattern with no firmware assist. I don't care if a projector should be able to display something without enhancements on or not. I just don't care - it doesn't matter to anyone *using* the projector. Instead, I want to turn on the projector and use all of its features to get the best picture I can get. If the firmware provides some bit of magic to give a better sharper image at seating distance without negatives, then that should be used. Reality creation does that.



The facts are that reality creation is almost magic. It adds some sharpness that's nothing like any other sharpening filters I've ever seen. I see tons more detail and much better focus on all content with no artifacts at all. In addition, it also seems to clean up some of the video compression noise. It's pure magic. Now, if I was doing a review of the capabilities of the projector, I'd definitely turn that off to do some comparisons on the hardware in the device. But the device also comes with firmware that runs it, and that firmware includes the magical reality creation. The final product is the combination of the hardware and the firmware. So when I actually go to use the device, that stuff gets turned on. I don't cripple it by turning that off because the lens *should* be ok without it. That's pure crazy talk. Whether or not it *should* be needed is absolutely irrelevant. The picture is much improved when it's on.



A shootout is not a review or analysis of only hardware. It's a comparison of the completed product at its best against another completed product at its best. Therefore, if I were doing a shootout, it would for sure be on. Anyone that knows Sonys and cares about having a fair shootout would know this and have it on.

It matters in the sense that we know there are improvements that can be had with better quality 4K panels. I agree that all that matters is the image quality and we know that since Sony uses the same panel and lens for their $5,000 unit and for their $25,000 unit even the cheapest Sony 4K projectors will benefit from improvements.

I wouldn’t give $25k of my money to Sony for this reason. Possibly if they had a much better quality lens and 4K panel but not when their cheapest and second to most expensive projector share these critical components. I know there are laser benefits etc but that is my opinion. I feel like they are ripping us off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,799 Posts
So here's a question for all that is bound to spark controversy.

With SDR content on/off contrast was considered very important. Black levels were also considered very important for image quality. It was always sited that with SDR content the APL of typical cinematic scene was less than 30%. However now that HDR content is becoming more prevalent, brightness is increasing. So is the apparent luminance increasing now so that ANSI contrast is the more important factor along with specular highlight brightness. Because it seems that using a 50% white and 50% black checkerboard for contrast measurement may be more and more important for HDR material rather than just on/off contrast.

There may be some scenes with star fields but in general that has to be the minority scene in cinema and the image brightness for most scenes are going up which makes on/off contrast less important.
I get 100k:1 in SDR without the DI, I get 43k:1 in HDR without the DI.

But with the DI, both iris positions can close to the very same maximum clamped setting, so actually with HDR I can get in the order of 400k:1 and SDR I can get about 250k:1.

Contrast is still extremely high in both cases. And in the very worst case, more than double the best Sony.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,799 Posts
It’s all about setting up an agreement with the wife:). We have “fun money accounts” that we put money into. That way she can’t say anything if I want a $20k projector and I can’t say anything if she wants to spend $20k on a family vacation. It has worked quite well for us in our 20+ year marriage.
I have just started working out that very concept with the wife.

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,145 Posts
Properly set up, 4K and HDR at 45 foot lamberts looks great. Not everything looks to the eye that much brighter than at 34 foot lamberts. It's mostly highlights and certain parts of the picture ) depending on the scene and movie ). The Matrix looked excellent at 45+ foot lamberts. And my wife has not once complained that it's too bright !
I agree.

My 385 is putting out 32 Ft lamberts on a 2000 hour bulb. When new I estimate it was putting out around 42 fl, (Sorry I didn't measure it new).

Anyway, with a new bulb and my UB900 dialed in just right along with Sony's HDR contrast slider, I was floored at how good 4k HDR looked. It seemed as good as any flat panel display I had seen. Coming from a Pioneer Kuro and a Panasonic Plasma I think the black levels compare very nicely and the color is outstanding. HDR gives it a lot of "pop" and realism that I just hadn't seen in the flatter SDR pictures.

I tried the German custom gamma curves but didn't really care for them. I don't know if it was the bulb being dimmer after 2000 hours or if the gamma curves were pushed too much for my environment and setup. But to me they distorted the color too much, things tended toward the green side. Since I didn't see a whole lot of improvement and didn't like the color issues, I just went back to the standard Sony default and use the HDR Contrast slider along with the UB 900 slider to get the proper image I like.

I am excited to see what the UB 820 brings to the table with it's variable tone mapping capability. Sounds like a must for projector HDR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,145 Posts
I get 100k:1 in SDR without the DI, I get 43k:1 in HDR without the DI.

But with the DI, both iris positions can close to the very same maximum clamped setting, so actually with HDR I can get in the order of 400k:1 and SDR I can get about 250k:1.

Contrast is still extremely high in both cases. And in the very worst case, more than double the best Sony.
That's really good. I would bet that your projection setup rivals most OLEDs then.

I guess my question would be if you have compared your projector to something like one of the DLP high ANSI projectors that can handle HDR. The JVC will obviously destroy the DLP for native on/off contrast but the DLP should have much higher ANSI.

The question is will your JVC with high on/off contrast produce the best image for most HDR cinema content or will the DLP with high ANSI be the better choice with HDR cinema content. Obviously if they were both outstanding that would be the best of both worlds. But now with HDR is ANSI starting to become more important or not?
 

·
Registered
JVC RS4500 | ST130 G4 135" | MRX 720 | MC303 MC152 | 6.1.4: B&W 802D3, 805D3, 702S2 | 4x15 IB Subs
Joined
·
8,988 Posts
If RC was shut off, it certainly didn't hurt the 385/640 comparison. We were struggling to find any differences between those two with both units calibrated, open iris and DI shut off with UHD movies. We would even guess wrong which unit was which at times! :p
Actually it sounds like it hurt that comparison quite a lot. With reality creation on, it would have been much more obvious that the 385es was sharper and had more detail than the rs640. Its pretty obvious over here between the re640 and the 675es. To be honest, if I disable reality creation on the 675es, it’s not really obvious which is sharper anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,214 Posts
Can someone give me a quick dummies guide to what equipment I need to measure contrast and Foot Lambert’s? I assume FL is measured at the screen? Just a photography light meter for FL?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,799 Posts
That's really good. I would bet that your projection setup rivals most OLEDs then.

I guess my question would be if you have compared your projector to something like one of the DLP high ANSI projectors that can handle HDR. The JVC will obviously destroy the DLP for native on/off contrast but the DLP should have much higher ANSI.

The question is will your JVC with high on/off contrast produce the best image for most HDR cinema content or will the DLP with high ANSI be the better choice with HDR cinema content. Obviously if they were both outstanding that would be the best of both worlds. But now with HDR is ANSI starting to become more important or not?
ANSI is important only in certain circumstances. You need to have a balance of both. My LCDTV has 3500:1 ANSI and 4000:1 contrast, and my JVC completely wipes the floor with it. And my JVC only has about 320:1 ANSI.... so, I think a combination of both is important.

If you had a projector with 1000:1 ANSI and 40k:1 On/Off I think that would look very very good.

The thing is with the good old Sony and JVC debate, you have Sony with 400:1 ANSI and 20k On/Off but then you have JVC with 30% less ANSI but up to 400% the on/off... the balance tips then at that point.

A DLP with 2000:1 and even 10,000:1 ANSI is going to look crap next to a JVC unless its showing literally only rhe ANSI test pattern and the brightest scenes you can find in content.

Most films fall under 5% APL, Florian from Projection Dream did a very in depth analysis of about 100+ films and not even Art of flight hit 50% I think that was 32% average or so.

Id rather have a projector which is SPECTACULAR from 0-10% ADL.

http://projectiondream.com/en/movie-brightness-adl-contrast-measurements/



Without Art of Flight to 'pollute' the chart

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,145 Posts
A
Most films fall under 5% APL, Florian from Projection Dream did a very in depth analysis of about 100+ films and not even Art of flight hit 50% I think that was 32% average or so.

Id rather have a projector which is SPECTACULAR from 0-10% ADL. [
I agree with you in that I would like to have projector that does at least 40K:1 on/off contrast and 1000:1 ANSI. A good balance of both.

But your information about most films fall under 5% APL. Was that study done before HDR mastering? Has the APL changed now that the dynamic range has been increased?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
It matters in the sense that we know there are improvements that can be had with better quality 4K panels. I agree that all that matters is the image quality and we know that since Sony uses the same panel and lens for their $5,000 unit and for their $25,000 unit even the cheapest Sony 4K projectors will benefit from improvements.

I wouldn’t give $25k of my money to Sony for this reason. Possibly if they had a much better quality lens and 4K panel but not when their cheapest and second to most expensive projector share these critical components. I know there are laser benefits etc but that is my opinion. I feel like they are ripping us off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I don't get this at all. The 4k panel has more native on/off and ANSI contrast than the RS4500 and is even used in the VW5000ES. And the lens is very good, even if it's not perfect.

If both are taken at MSRP, the Sony is very competitively priced against the JVC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archibald1
1561 - 1580 of 3111 Posts
Top