CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

CIR Engineering · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 3:18 pm Post subject: They do look good together :)

Here is the back of my own G90. The two best IFB cards ever made, the IFB v2 on top and the IFB v3 on bottom. I like keeping one of the best versions of any cards that come out. I still have one of JohnHW's DVI cards in another of my G90s because that one is also really good. But it's just kind of nice to see four HDMI inputs and a 3D output on the back of my theater G90 Smile

craigr

kabuby77 · Joined: 28 Mar 2011 Posts: 147 Location: Italy

Can you make some tests?

CIR Engineering · Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 12:50 pm Post subject:

Well the two cards have very similar video quality to one another. Moome totally redesigned the opamp configuration for the v3, but video wise on screen I don't see much difference as both are outstanding. The v1 and v2 used three discrete opamps while the v3 uses a brand new opamp that has all three amps on one IC.

The DA IC config is the same as that on the v2 and is still excellent.

The v3 board has a better power supply and is cleaner. The v3 also uses a newer HDMI chip.

On the v3 Moome added a small speaker (in the black can) that chirps when the card receives a remote command (in addition the led still flashes like the earlier cards). The chirp is helpful when working with the remote.

Both cards do an excellent job with 1080p 72Hz and below.

craigr

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

Is there going to be one for the NEC XGs?

CIR Engineering · Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 1:23 pm Post subject:

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

Cheers mate, i have the current NEC HDMI MOOME card in my Runco.

PM replied to Wink

**kal** · Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:21 pm Post subject:

CIR Engineering · Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:23 pm Post subject:

**kal** · Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:30 pm Post subject:

Sorry - yes - he stopped for a while like you mentioned but they're now available again. They're not a big seller. The Sony ones outsell every other one combined.

Kal

cinema mad · Joined: 25 Nov 2009 Posts: 219

Ron W · Joined: 07 Aug 2009 Posts: 860 Location: Mississauga

cinema mad · Joined: 25 Nov 2009 Posts: 219

Apparently the Darblet is designed to be inserted into similar video chain as the example above,
idealy the last link in the chain in front of projector. Others on AVS have reported no problems running after there Radiance VPs

Here's some threads on AVS about the Darblet inc the tec behined it..

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1399154

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1410383

Cheers

CIR Engineering · Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 5:25 pm Post subject:

ecrabb · Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 6:36 pm Post subject:

Hey, Craig -

I'm all for calibration and faithful representation. It's critically important. But, once we have that baseline, why can't we play with the image a bit to make it look a bit "better" if we think that's what it should look like? I liken it to bass and treble controls or EQ. I've never EQ'd my system completely flat because it sounds boring and lifeless. I've always applied a "house curve" because it sounds better. A lot better. Is it faithful reproduction? Not exactly, but I don't care because *I like it*.

Face it: All photography and video is just a representation of reality, and not a very faithful one at that - even at the highest of high-end. Color gamuts are compressed, high-frequencies are filtered and down-sampled, the production designers and art directors have their way with it, it's color-graded by more humans, and finally jammed into a codec with a bitrate that represents a mere fraction of its former uncompressed self. Then it's decoded again in your player, and finally displayed. After all that, after all those steps in the chain, who's to say what, exactly something should look like and what should look "better"?

Like I said, I'm all for calibration and having a known target - a standard. But, once we establish that baseline, why not "tweak" if indeed, in the end, the picture looks "better", whether that be a bit more colorful, a bit more life-like, or just a bit more interesting?

Besides, I think the Darblet is doing a lot more than you think, and none of the things you imaged it was. Read the white paper, and then see what you think. I don't think it's snake oil or sh*t as much as it's unabashedly saying, "we can do something to the image that will make the image 'pop' and be more interesting, and that people will prefer that, so long as you can enable disable it, why not?"

http://darbeevision.com/assets/documents/DarbeeVision%20Whitepaper%20with%20Tech%20Details%2020120415.pdf

I can say after sitting through a pretty lengthy demo of a processor and projector at CEDIA last year, I have a different perspective. The box (can't remember the name) enlarged the color gamut by shifting the primaries out, but leaving mid-tones where they were supposed to be. So, for instance, skin tones stayed faithful, but intense colors became more intense.

I have to say, after seeing that demo, "faithful" reproduction doesn't necessarily have to be the target, IMHO. Not as a home user who wants to watch movies, anyway. If you're in mastering, yes...

This is an interesting discussion, but it probably doesn't belong in this thread. Shall I split these posts off into a new thread specifically on the Darblet?

SC

ecrabb · Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 6:53 pm Post subject:

OK, brain fart. At CEDIA, what I saw *was* the Darbee box (an earlier, larger, more expensive version), driving a TruVue VANGO LED projector. The LED projector had a significantly larger color space than Rec. 709, so this box was a really good match for that projector. I have to say, it was honestly beautiful to look at.

This should be a really interesting thread, so I'm going to leave it here for awhile, then split these posts into a new "DarbeeVision Darblet" thread tonight.

SC

Nashou66 · Joined: 12 Jan 2007 Posts: 16171 Location: West Seneca NY

Boilermaker has a thread here on it some where. I'll try to find it.

Nashou

cinema mad · Joined: 25 Nov 2009 Posts: 219

Heres A link to A Darblet review by A respected pro calibrator umr http://homecinemaguru.com/?p=1909

From My understanding This tec was originally used in the pro side of the market for Hollywood colorists & apparently the Algorithm will not alter Gamut/Hue.

Quote"1. Our mantra is..."Make the best picture fidelity that you can, then process with DVP." Great in...sublime out.
2. Calibrate with instruments to achieve the desired fidelity factors for your display hardware. Then add DVP and calibrate with your eyes. At that point your color calibration (by instruments) should confirm that we don't change the hue, your eyes/brain will confirm if you like the luminance of each pixel. -DD"

Darbee Visual Presence technology doesn't modify noise, blocking, or scale the image, so put the Darblet after such global image modification technologies. The Darblet creates a greater appearance of clarity and natural contrast so you may turn down the sharpening and contrast sweetening/modification technologies in the devices that are in line before it.
- DD

Quote"This White Paper explains the genesis of the technology and development of the product"
http://darbeevision.com/assets/documents/DarbeeVision%20Whitepaper%20with%20Tech%20Details%2020120415.pdf

Quote"These may also help explain the science behind this process"

http://www.engineeringtv.com/video/Darbee-Visual-Presence-DVP;CES-2011
http://www.engineeringtv.com/video/DarbeeVision-DVP-History

Alan Gouger now runs the Darblet with his 4K Barco DPI projector, It seems From what Im reading the sharper the projector the better the Darblet performs even with projectors like Sim2 Lumis DLP..

Cheers..

kabuby77 · Joined: 28 Mar 2011 Posts: 147 Location: Italy

I don't like too many things in the video chain. Radiance has a lot o filters too.

Ron W · Joined: 07 Aug 2009 Posts: 860 Location: Mississauga

If one watches the video interviewing the founder and discussing the technology, it sounds like the ultimate goal here is to have this technology inserted in to display devices on a mass basis.

mc86 · Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 2:46 pm Post subject:

http://www.google.com/patents/US7995835

The patent gives a 19 step procedure for how to implement the system directly using Adobe Photoshop -- so there need be no confusion as to what they do, although details over the setting variation is the $250 darblet vs the more powerful box, etc. are unclear to me still. The psychology they claim is overviewed in the patent:

Insights into brain theory and neurophysiology inspired the Darbee Transform. Binocular creatures possess brains that combine the signals arising in the retina of each eye in a structure called the lateral geniculate nucleus, or LGN. The LGN interdigitates the two retinal images and generates signals that eventually drive the muscles of the eyes to minimize the disparity, or difference between the images, by converging the eyes at the point of attention. LGN neurons compute the image disparity with the help of a process known as lateral inhibition, a phenomenon found ubiquitously throughout nervous systems of all kinds.

The Darbee Transform capitalizes on these phenomena, and the inventor believes that it thereby processes images in a way that would have been computed anyhow by neural circuits in the pathway between the retinas and the visual cortex. Looking on natural brain processes as a filter, DVn simply presents to the filter input that which the filter is designed to pass to its output anyhow, so the information goes, as it were, straight through. As a partial validation of this explanation as to why DarbeeVision works, it is interesting to note that viewing DVn images with only one eye seems to enhance the perceived 3D effect. In that case, it is not possible to explore the image normally by changing the convergence point of both eyes, so the brain is “fooled” into believing that the image is stereo, as if it had been perceived using both eyes.

Matt