|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | The JVC looks much better in real life than these crappy pictures as you will never be able to show 100% what is on screen. And this is why I say screenshot is just bull!  |
You're right neither of the technologies will be able to show it's full capabilities through these shots, but there are a few things the camera will hold true to, and that naturalness and punch (colors/depth).
Plus, I'll need to wait until the sun goes down to really get things going.
Now, when we get to flesh tones..
Strids is right, if you've never seen a CRT projector that can more than 100% resolve a 1080P source, you really should be quiet.
Be back later...or as Arnold would have put it.. I'll be bak
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
If you set up your CRT correct black can be measured if you have the right equpment, the JVC can not be measured in black with poor equipment either. Barco says the Cine 9 has 30000:1 in contrast. 10-12 fl with a CRT on a screen bigger than 80" is in fantasy land.
And when we talk ansi and intrascene contrast, witch is much more important in the kind of scenes in these pictures the JVC is superior to the CRT by far. Ansi contrast is only measured with a checkerboard and can not be taken into the real world, and that is why I talk about intrascene contrast.
Measuring ansi contrast with a checkerboard pattern the JVC measure around 400:1 and a good CRT max 100:1. And with a mixed scene the CRT looses itīs ability to show black very fast and looses to even poor digitals with low on/off but high ansi/intrascenecontrast like a DLP. But this is something you CRT gyus seem to overllook as the only thing important is to bring down the brightness and set it with high enough gamma you get black crush from hell, but it shows 0 IRE totally black.
A correctly implemented Di is not a pile of crap, and JVCīs first try actually works very well.
And when you talk flat and with no pop you have no idea what you are talking about, this is one of the weakes areas of CRT. |
Why are you beating that poor Barco 909 to death with a stick, we all know that these old noisy low bandwidth CRT machines wont resolve much more than a good PAL DVD format.
You have to admit you have never seen a high bandwidth CRT projector for real.
As Mike posted some time ago, we all have the option to buy whatever digital projector we like, we have a CRT by choice, and you have no clue what it is, that makes us prefer the old Marquee over any digital we can get in this world.
There is something very very nice about the blu ray format when you see it on a good Marquee, and without any processing to mess up the signal.
Is it super bright.. no. is it super sharp.. no. Is it a plug and play shiny black plastic gay toy.. no.. So what is it we like about these huge old projectors.. Im quite sure you will never find out. |
It is ok with me that you guys like CRT, I could not care less.
But when you say things like a Marquee is super bright, super sharp, much more dynamic than the X500 and other bull**** I can not let that go.
A supermodifyed Marquee is not much better than a 909 I am sure, but you guys have the oportunity to show me/us, but you wonīt do that and I draw my conclutions from that. A CRT will always have the limitations I have mentioned hundreds of times not matter the bandwith and better tubes and other stuff. It will always look like VHS or maby DVD compared to a good digital. You can modify all you want and watch the placebo effect on your screens.
And digitals have a huge andvantage over your bath tub/old snowmobile projectors, they are still being developed and will only get better and better in the future. You can not say the same about your beloved CRT.
But this is like beating some sence into a stone, and you do not have experience to talk about this. I admit I have limited CRT experience, but you will not admit you have limited digital experience. I live in 2015 not the stoneage, and yes, CRT is stoneage tech compared to my X500.
And by the way the X500 has a matte finish not shiny. 
You have the oportunity to show me the wonderful picture of these huge old projectors, but you refuse to do that. Why is that?? I would gladly admit I was wrong if you show me a CRT that is better than a ok digital (it does not have to be a JVC) and I would lay flat and appologise on this forum. As I have no problem in admitting it if it was, you on the other hand is so narrow sighted and would never admit a digital to be better even if it was. And that is the definition of a FANBOY! |
How do you know what difference bandwidth do, or gain structure true the video chain, or black pedestal, or noise, when all you have never experienced it. ?
How can you comment on stuff you dont have a clue about..? |
It does not have the huge effect you say it has! And I am 100% it does not do much with te on/off other than what you gain with brightness and that does not change it mutch, it does nothing with ansi/intrascene contrast+++
But please enlighten me and if you dare please show me as this stupid discussion will never go anywhere. The only way we can settle this is by seeing them side by side.
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | The JVC looks much better in real life than these crappy pictures as you will never be able to show 100% what is on screen. And this is why I say screenshot is just bull! |
You're right neither of the technologies will be able to show it's full capabilities through these shots, but there are a few things the camera will hold true to, and that naturalness and punch (colors/depth).
Plus, I'll need to wait until the sun goes down to really get things going.
Now, when we get to flesh tones..
Strids is right, if you've never seen a CRT projector that can more than 100% resolve a 1080P source, you really should be quiet.
Be back later...or as Arnold would have put it.. I'll be bak |
So you donīt have a real HT??
So you think your CRT has more punch and depth than my X500?? How many Lux do you measure at your screen (full screen 100 IRE), but you probarbly donīt have a lightmeter and donīt know. And a screenshot can not show naturalness (softness to you) and punch as this is impossible to show true with a screenshot, it depends on many factors and how you setup your camera. What you can see to some degree is sharpness, detail, clarity and depth and in these pictures the JVC is totally destroying the CRT when it comes to this.
And fleshtones is bull, your uncalibrated CRT will not show fleshtones in a correct way anyway. And to think you can see this from a screenshot is so far from reality it is scary. 
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | The JVC looks much better in real life than these crappy pictures as you will never be able to show 100% what is on screen. And this is why I say screenshot is just bull! |
You're right neither of the technologies will be able to show it's full capabilities through these shots, but there are a few things the camera will hold true to, and that naturalness and punch (colors/depth).
Plus, I'll need to wait until the sun goes down to really get things going.
Now, when we get to flesh tones..
Strids is right, if you've never seen a CRT projector that can more than 100% resolve a 1080P source, you really should be quiet.
Be back later...or as Arnold would have put it.. I'll be bak |
So you donīt have a real HT??
So you think your CRT has more punch and depth than my X500?? How many Lux do you measure at your screen (full screen 100 IRE), but you probarbly donīt have a lightmeter and donīt know. And a screenshot can not show naturalness (softness to you) and punch as this is impossible to show true with a screenshot, it depends on many factors and how you setup your camera. What you can see to some degree is sharpness, detail, clarity and depth and in these pictures the JVC is totally destroying the CRT when it comes to this.
And fleshtones is bull, your uncalibrated CRT will not show fleshtones in a correct way anyway. And to think you can see this from a screenshot is so far from reality it is scary. |
Dude, are you a politician, because you're flapping your mouth and trying speak something into existence. Unless you have special powers over matter, shut the hell up and wait and see.
Out of the three things I'll be doing when I get back, I've done one already.
Just thought fire up the Marquee and take a quickie, and shot it without doing the focus or anything else for that matter. Just want to sure Andie it's best to keep quiet..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: |
Mine
 |
Are you seriously this stupid or are you just trying to be adopted to the clown school?
If you cant tell that the difference on your not so down sampled picture and my down sampled picture you really need a doctor.
Also strange why only Stridsvognen and you are de only one talking. That's because the others see this and keep quit.
And they do not want to be a part of your hilarious writing.
Keep it up the more you guys write the more stupid you get. And I think that people get it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: |
Are you seriously this stupid or are you just trying to be adopted to the clown school?
If you cant tell that the difference on your not so down sampled picture and my down sampled picture you really need a doctor.
Also strange why only Stridsvognen and you are de only one talking. That's because the others see this and keep quit.
And they do not want to be a part of your hilarious writing.
Keep it up the more you guys write the more stupid you get. And I think that people get it. |
Its not all of us who have experienced a true interlaced CRT projector.. together with the morning coffe.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: |
Are you seriously this stupid or are you just trying to be adopted to the clown school? |
But hey, hang in there. Wait until we get to flesh tones and such. Then the people will be able to see how artificial your shots really look.
Not touched by you:
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now, since your purpose here is to convince us of how much better the JVC is over the CRT. So far, you've only shown me how much sharper it is, but what you yourself was not expecting, is that you'll also be showing how flat the image is, and how un-natural it looks.
Oh, but wait until get to Flesh Tones.. I can tell you now, you're going to get pissed at me, because you've never seen what a 1080P CRT projector does with colors and the range of colors.
Would I want an X500 - Hell No
Last edited by mp20748 on Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:56 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: |
Are you seriously this stupid or are you just trying to be adopted to the clown school?
If you cant tell that the difference on your not so down sampled picture and my down sampled picture you really need a doctor.
Also strange why only Stridsvognen and you are de only one talking. That's because the others see this and keep quit.
And they do not want to be a part of your hilarious writing.
Keep it up the more you guys write the more stupid you get. And I think that people get it. |
Its not all of us who have experienced a true interlaced CRT projector.. together with the morning coffe. |
Stupid written of me about interlased PJ. That was not what I ment, the point I wanted to get out then was lines on a CRT ant pixels on a digital. But has that something to do with what we discuss here now. If I not recall right mr stridsvognen you are that guy That can see anything from a picture lol, why can't you just be honest and tell how you see the pictures. All you and MP does here just prove everything I say, and that you know wery little about picture quality and what a picture show. I am so glad that you just keep it going and let everybody know how you guys are.
Maybe some here will find out how fantastic a digital has become in 2015 and more and more people see this.
Your CRTs will be so crushed in a side by side test that it's not funny for the old tractor barco or marquee.
Show me something that can and I will say so. Even if Only a picture look better here in on CRT I will say it, and I know it won't in a side by side test.
But seriously no sh*t throw but you and MP really need your eyes checked out. Because I think everybody else understand more than you think. It will be stupid not to say so.
Just wonder does the world go under if you have to admit that a jvcx500 is better? And it is, and by Extreamly much also at everything. I can admit if a CRT is better. But still it's so far far from that I do not think it's possible.
But I am open and bring me the bandwitch and mod. If you know something about CRT you will understand limitations.
Just a question do you know how a CRT show MTF in 1080I?
You all know now that MTF in 1080P is around 30-40 On your so called interlased machine hehe.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: |
Are you seriously this stupid or are you just trying to be adopted to the clown school?
If you cant tell that the difference on your not so down sampled picture and my down sampled picture you really need a doctor.
Also strange why only Stridsvognen and you are de only one talking. That's because the others see this and keep quit.
And they do not want to be a part of your hilarious writing.
Keep it up the more you guys write the more stupid you get. And I think that people get it. |
Its not all of us who have experienced a true interlaced CRT projector.. together with the morning coffe. |
Stupid written of me about interlased PJ. That was not what I ment, the point I wanted to get out then was lines on a CRT ant pixels on a digital. But has that something to do with what we discuss here now. If I not recall right mr stridsvognen you are that guy That can see anything from a picture lol, why can't you just be honest and tell how you see the pictures. All you and MP does here just prove everything I say, and that you know wery little about picture quality and what a picture show. I am so glad that you just keep it going and let everybody know how you guys are.
Maybe some here will find out how fantastic a digital has become in 2015 and more and more people see this.
Your CRTs will be so crushed in a side by side test that it's not funny for the old tractor barco or marquee.
Show me something that can and I will say so. Even if Only a picture look better here in on CRT I will say it, and I know it won't in a side by side test.
But seriously no sh*t throw but you and MP really need your eyes checked out. Because I think everybody else understand more than you think. It will be stupid not to say so.
Just wonder does the world go under if you have to admit that a jvcx500 is better? And it is, and by Extreamly much also at everything. I can admit if a CRT is better. But still it's so far far from that I do not think it's possible.
But I am open and bring me the bandwitch and mod. If you know something about CRT you will understand limitations.
Just a question do you know how a CRT show MTF in 1080I?
You all know now that MTF in 1080P is around 30-40 On your so called interlased machine hehe. |
Your the one with the interlaced CRT, never had one of those.
The day i see a digital that makes me relax to a movie, and give me a realistic image, ill buy one again.
The digital is sharp yes, its also sharper than it has to be, i still not seen a digital reproduce something, making it look realistic.
This is not a competition, i know why you and many others like the digital.
Other than features like e sh*t, DI, auto calibtration, more light output and some stuff like that the digital has not been moving much.
A big force with CRT is the gamma response on all the formats we have is build up around CRT tech.
So with a clean high quality analog video chain you dont need to proces the source material to match the display device.
I dont know of any digital projector who is not processor/ software corrected.
Your so MTF focused that i wonder why you dont prefer DLP projectors, at least thats a true digital projector where you dont need to convert to analog before or in the panels.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curt Palme
CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 24396
Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Diddern, you're really pushing the limit here with insulting others. This is a CRT forum, there is a different area for digital. It's very easy to click the 'delete' button on you. Keep it up, and I'll do it.
I've said before over at avs, if you think that digital is a CRT killer, that's great, go right ahead and think that, and feel free to post all over the internet in every digital forum that this is the case. Here, we enjoy our CRT, be they old, heavy, and however else you want to describe them as.
If you want to stage a shootout between digital and CRT, I'm all for that, but to come in here and claim that all CRTers need their eyesight checked, along with your 'heh heh' comments, those comments simply aren't welcome.
You have been warned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
If you set up your CRT correct black can be measured if you have the right equpment, the JVC can not be measured in black with poor equipment either. Barco says the Cine 9 has 30000:1 in contrast. 10-12 fl with a CRT on a screen bigger than 80" is in fantasy land.
And when we talk ansi and intrascene contrast, witch is much more important in the kind of scenes in these pictures the JVC is superior to the CRT by far. Ansi contrast is only measured with a checkerboard and can not be taken into the real world, and that is why I talk about intrascene contrast.
Measuring ansi contrast with a checkerboard pattern the JVC measure around 400:1 and a good CRT max 100:1. And with a mixed scene the CRT looses itīs ability to show black very fast and looses to even poor digitals with low on/off but high ansi/intrascenecontrast like a DLP. But this is something you CRT gyus seem to overllook as the only thing important is to bring down the brightness and set it with high enough gamma you get black crush from hell, but it shows 0 IRE totally black.
A correctly implemented Di is not a pile of crap, and JVCīs first try actually works very well.
And when you talk flat and with no pop you have no idea what you are talking about, this is one of the weakes areas of CRT. |
Why are you beating that poor Barco 909 to death with a stick, we all know that these old noisy low bandwidth CRT machines wont resolve much more than a good PAL DVD format.
You have to admit you have never seen a high bandwidth CRT projector for real.
As Mike posted some time ago, we all have the option to buy whatever digital projector we like, we have a CRT by choice, and you have no clue what it is, that makes us prefer the old Marquee over any digital we can get in this world.
There is something very very nice about the blu ray format when you see it on a good Marquee, and without any processing to mess up the signal.
Is it super bright.. no. is it super sharp.. no. Is it a plug and play shiny black plastic gay toy.. no.. So what is it we like about these huge old projectors.. Im quite sure you will never find out. |
It is ok with me that you guys like CRT, I could not care less.
But when you say things like a Marquee is super bright, super sharp, much more dynamic than the X500 and other bull**** I can not let that go.
A supermodifyed Marquee is not much better than a 909 I am sure, but you guys have the oportunity to show me/us, but you wonīt do that and I draw my conclutions from that. A CRT will always have the limitations I have mentioned hundreds of times not matter the bandwith and better tubes and other stuff. It will always look like VHS or maby DVD compared to a good digital. You can modify all you want and watch the placebo effect on your screens.
And digitals have a huge andvantage over your bath tub/old snowmobile projectors, they are still being developed and will only get better and better in the future. You can not say the same about your beloved CRT.
But this is like beating some sence into a stone, and you do not have experience to talk about this. I admit I have limited CRT experience, but you will not admit you have limited digital experience. I live in 2015 not the stoneage, and yes, CRT is stoneage tech compared to my X500.
And by the way the X500 has a matte finish not shiny.
You have the oportunity to show me the wonderful picture of these huge old projectors, but you refuse to do that. Why is that?? I would gladly admit I was wrong if you show me a CRT that is better than a ok digital (it does not have to be a JVC) and I would lay flat and appologise on this forum. As I have no problem in admitting it if it was, you on the other hand is so narrow sighted and would never admit a digital to be better even if it was. And that is the definition of a FANBOY! |
How do you know what difference bandwidth do, or gain structure true the video chain, or black pedestal, or noise, when all you have never experienced it. ?
How can you comment on stuff you dont have a clue about..? |
I have seen and tested different cards form Greg Eiseman with different bandwith mods, different hdmi mods and video mods.
So that I do not have a clue is very wrong mr stridsvognen. And they did make a difference.
Spesialy to noise in the picture, that did get totally gone or almost. And the image got some sharper than orginal cards.
But you are the only one that know this LOL. I do not know the details and not want to know. Stop this nonsense and smell the reality.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Curt Palme wrote: | Diddern, you're really pushing the limit here with insulting others. This is a CRT forum, there is a different area for digital. It's very easy to click the 'delete' button on you. Keep it up, and I'll do it.
I've said before over at avs, if you think that digital is a CRT killer, that's great, go right ahead and think that, and feel free to post all over the internet in every digital forum that this is the case. Here, we enjoy our CRT, be they old, heavy, and however else you want to describe them as.
If you want to stage a shootout between digital and CRT, I'm all for that, but to come in here and claim that all CRTers need their eyesight checked, along with your 'heh heh' comments, those comments simply aren't welcome.
You have been warned. |
I know that Curt, but read the topic to this forum, have you seen me on other forums that do not have stupid topic and far from reality. Have I started any shitt throw mr Curt?
I get it everytime first and then kick back, and if you talk to me I think it's fair that you also tell others here that to throw sh*t is not welcome either.
I have also saied I do not favor any brand just quality of picture. Then should also untrue topic be stopped.
I have no intention to take hobbies away and only stick to the fact any normal crt forum I do not touch And I newer will.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | Now, since your purpose here is to convince us of how much better the JVC is over the CRT. So far, you've only shown me how much sharper it is, but what you yourself was not expecting, is that you'll also be showing how flat the image is, and how un-natural it looks.
Oh, but wait until get to Flesh Tones.. I can tell you now, you're going to get pissed at me, because you've never seen what a 1080P CRT projector does with colors and the range of colors.
Would I want an X500 - Hell No |
The picture does not only show sharpness and you see this as well as everybody else, but will not admit it. And when you say how flat it is I really donīt understand what you are seeing as your CRT looks very flat compared to the JVC. And when you say how unnatural it looks, look at your CRT what is natural about that, I would never call a soft, dull add flat picture like yours anything near natural.
And when you say fleshtones and range of colors you have no idea what you are talking about like everything else in this discussion. You time and time again show you are totally clueless and know nothing about what a good picture should look like and you are clueless when it comes to photography and the limitations of screenshots. If you read ecrabīs posts about photography one more time you might learn something.
But you and stridsvognen are so narrow sighted and only have eyes for CRT that you forget there is a whole world out there evolving and moving forwards. But by all means I am not trying to get you guys to quit you passion to CRTīs, I am just trying to say there is something better out there. I am open minded and qurious about what is going on in the world and try to follow the evolvement of projector technology and want to experience that evolvement.
And I am saying to you and stridsvognen: Why donīt you show ut this eight wonder of the world 30000000000mhz CRT and how wonderful it is. If I am wrong I will gladly admit it here and take all the humiliation, but since you are not willing to do a side by side test (witch is the only way to test this) I draw my own conclutions. I would gladly invite you to my batcave here in Norway, but I know how difficult and expensive it is to bring a snowmobile from the USA or Denmark here to me. And that is why I am willing to come to you.
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Curt a shot out yes, but you live to far away.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
If you set up your CRT correct black can be measured if you have the right equpment, the JVC can not be measured in black with poor equipment either. Barco says the Cine 9 has 30000:1 in contrast. 10-12 fl with a CRT on a screen bigger than 80" is in fantasy land.
And when we talk ansi and intrascene contrast, witch is much more important in the kind of scenes in these pictures the JVC is superior to the CRT by far. Ansi contrast is only measured with a checkerboard and can not be taken into the real world, and that is why I talk about intrascene contrast.
Measuring ansi contrast with a checkerboard pattern the JVC measure around 400:1 and a good CRT max 100:1. And with a mixed scene the CRT looses itīs ability to show black very fast and looses to even poor digitals with low on/off but high ansi/intrascenecontrast like a DLP. But this is something you CRT gyus seem to overllook as the only thing important is to bring down the brightness and set it with high enough gamma you get black crush from hell, but it shows 0 IRE totally black.
A correctly implemented Di is not a pile of crap, and JVCīs first try actually works very well.
And when you talk flat and with no pop you have no idea what you are talking about, this is one of the weakes areas of CRT. |
Why are you beating that poor Barco 909 to death with a stick, we all know that these old noisy low bandwidth CRT machines wont resolve much more than a good PAL DVD format.
You have to admit you have never seen a high bandwidth CRT projector for real.
As Mike posted some time ago, we all have the option to buy whatever digital projector we like, we have a CRT by choice, and you have no clue what it is, that makes us prefer the old Marquee over any digital we can get in this world.
There is something very very nice about the blu ray format when you see it on a good Marquee, and without any processing to mess up the signal.
Is it super bright.. no. is it super sharp.. no. Is it a plug and play shiny black plastic gay toy.. no.. So what is it we like about these huge old projectors.. Im quite sure you will never find out. |
It is ok with me that you guys like CRT, I could not care less.
But when you say things like a Marquee is super bright, super sharp, much more dynamic than the X500 and other bull**** I can not let that go.
A supermodifyed Marquee is not much better than a 909 I am sure, but you guys have the oportunity to show me/us, but you wonīt do that and I draw my conclutions from that. A CRT will always have the limitations I have mentioned hundreds of times not matter the bandwith and better tubes and other stuff. It will always look like VHS or maby DVD compared to a good digital. You can modify all you want and watch the placebo effect on your screens.
And digitals have a huge andvantage over your bath tub/old snowmobile projectors, they are still being developed and will only get better and better in the future. You can not say the same about your beloved CRT.
But this is like beating some sence into a stone, and you do not have experience to talk about this. I admit I have limited CRT experience, but you will not admit you have limited digital experience. I live in 2015 not the stoneage, and yes, CRT is stoneage tech compared to my X500.
And by the way the X500 has a matte finish not shiny.
You have the oportunity to show me the wonderful picture of these huge old projectors, but you refuse to do that. Why is that?? I would gladly admit I was wrong if you show me a CRT that is better than a ok digital (it does not have to be a JVC) and I would lay flat and appologise on this forum. As I have no problem in admitting it if it was, you on the other hand is so narrow sighted and would never admit a digital to be better even if it was. And that is the definition of a FANBOY! |
How do you know what difference bandwidth do, or gain structure true the video chain, or black pedestal, or noise, when all you have never experienced it. ?
How can you comment on stuff you dont have a clue about..? |
I have seen and tested different cards form Greg Eiseman with different bandwith mods, different hdmi mods and video mods.
So that I do not have a clue is very wrong mr stridsvognen. And they did make a difference.
Spesialy to noise in the picture, that did get totally gone or almost. And the image got some sharper than orginal cards.
But you are the only one that know this LOL. I do not know the details and not want to know. Stop this nonsense and smell the reality. |
We never seen any hint of proof that Greg ever improved the bandwidth.
You did post quite a lot about that testing, and other than a lot of problems, a 909 turning into a 808 and stuff like that, it was totally unprofessional, and can only be seen a attempt to get CRT looks bad.
If you want to prove me wrong, just post a bandwidth test of that moddet CRT resolving a 200Mhz signal without peaking or other distortion.
We still miss to see a 720P 60 hz resolved decent on a Barco.
That dont mean it has no quality, and no one like it for what it is, it just wont resolve a HD source.
And claiming that bandwidth dont do much difference is a bit like saying that a digital 1080P projector look almost the same as a digital 576P projector.
Is it possible that you have never seen a CRT able to resolve 148Mhz.?
I have a dialog with Andreas, and you reply, are you the same person with 2 profiles.?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
If you set up your CRT correct black can be measured if you have the right equpment, the JVC can not be measured in black with poor equipment either. Barco says the Cine 9 has 30000:1 in contrast. 10-12 fl with a CRT on a screen bigger than 80" is in fantasy land.
And when we talk ansi and intrascene contrast, witch is much more important in the kind of scenes in these pictures the JVC is superior to the CRT by far. Ansi contrast is only measured with a checkerboard and can not be taken into the real world, and that is why I talk about intrascene contrast.
Measuring ansi contrast with a checkerboard pattern the JVC measure around 400:1 and a good CRT max 100:1. And with a mixed scene the CRT looses itīs ability to show black very fast and looses to even poor digitals with low on/off but high ansi/intrascenecontrast like a DLP. But this is something you CRT gyus seem to overllook as the only thing important is to bring down the brightness and set it with high enough gamma you get black crush from hell, but it shows 0 IRE totally black.
A correctly implemented Di is not a pile of crap, and JVCīs first try actually works very well.
And when you talk flat and with no pop you have no idea what you are talking about, this is one of the weakes areas of CRT. |
Why are you beating that poor Barco 909 to death with a stick, we all know that these old noisy low bandwidth CRT machines wont resolve much more than a good PAL DVD format.
You have to admit you have never seen a high bandwidth CRT projector for real.
As Mike posted some time ago, we all have the option to buy whatever digital projector we like, we have a CRT by choice, and you have no clue what it is, that makes us prefer the old Marquee over any digital we can get in this world.
There is something very very nice about the blu ray format when you see it on a good Marquee, and without any processing to mess up the signal.
Is it super bright.. no. is it super sharp.. no. Is it a plug and play shiny black plastic gay toy.. no.. So what is it we like about these huge old projectors.. Im quite sure you will never find out. |
It is ok with me that you guys like CRT, I could not care less.
But when you say things like a Marquee is super bright, super sharp, much more dynamic than the X500 and other bull**** I can not let that go.
A supermodifyed Marquee is not much better than a 909 I am sure, but you guys have the oportunity to show me/us, but you wonīt do that and I draw my conclutions from that. A CRT will always have the limitations I have mentioned hundreds of times not matter the bandwith and better tubes and other stuff. It will always look like VHS or maby DVD compared to a good digital. You can modify all you want and watch the placebo effect on your screens.
And digitals have a huge andvantage over your bath tub/old snowmobile projectors, they are still being developed and will only get better and better in the future. You can not say the same about your beloved CRT.
But this is like beating some sence into a stone, and you do not have experience to talk about this. I admit I have limited CRT experience, but you will not admit you have limited digital experience. I live in 2015 not the stoneage, and yes, CRT is stoneage tech compared to my X500.
And by the way the X500 has a matte finish not shiny.
You have the oportunity to show me the wonderful picture of these huge old projectors, but you refuse to do that. Why is that?? I would gladly admit I was wrong if you show me a CRT that is better than a ok digital (it does not have to be a JVC) and I would lay flat and appologise on this forum. As I have no problem in admitting it if it was, you on the other hand is so narrow sighted and would never admit a digital to be better even if it was. And that is the definition of a FANBOY! |
How do you know what difference bandwidth do, or gain structure true the video chain, or black pedestal, or noise, when all you have never experienced it. ?
How can you comment on stuff you dont have a clue about..? |
I have seen and tested different cards form Greg Eiseman with different bandwith mods, different hdmi mods and video mods.
So that I do not have a clue is very wrong mr stridsvognen. And they did make a difference.
Spesialy to noise in the picture, that did get totally gone or almost. And the image got some sharper than orginal cards.
But you are the only one that know this LOL. I do not know the details and not want to know. Stop this nonsense and smell the reality. |
We never seen any hint of proof that Greg ever improved the bandwidth.
You did post quite a lot about that testing, and other than a lot of problems, a 909 turning into a 808 and stuff like that, it was totally unprofessional, and can only be seen a attempt to get CRT looks bad.
If you want to prove me wrong, just post a bandwidth test of that moddet CRT resolving a 200Mhz signal without peaking or other distortion.
We still miss to see a 720P 60 hz resolved decent on a Barco.
That dont mean it has no quality, and no one like it for what it is, it just wont resolve a HD source.
And claiming that bandwidth dont do much difference is a bit like saying that a digital 1080P projector look almost the same as a digital 576P projector.
Is it possible that you have never seen a CRT able to resolve 148Mhz.?
I have a dialog with Andreas, and you reply, are you the same person with 2 profiles.? |
You know that we are not the same person.
And have you seen new simulation grade tubes?
They are also much better than orginals. More light and sharper.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Stridsvognen I do not own a CRT anymore.
So I can't post pictures. And if I had I post it at a CRT forum, not a forum that clames better than a top vw1000 sony 4K
If you want to discuss this with me send me a PM and I call you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | Stridsvognen I do not own a CRT anymore.
So I can't post pictures. And if I had I post it at a CRT forum, not a forum that clames better than a top vw1000 sony 4K
If you want to discuss this with me send me a PM and I call you. |
We are talking about you claiming to have experience with a high bandwidth CRT projector.. But you never had one, or have never seen one.. But you still keep claiming the difference is not very big.. How can you claim stuff like that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 16, 2015 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Curt Palme wrote: | Diddern, you're really pushing the limit here with insulting others. This is a CRT forum, there is a different area for digital. It's very easy to click the 'delete' button on you. Keep it up, and I'll do it.
I've said before over at avs, if you think that digital is a CRT killer, that's great, go right ahead and think that, and feel free to post all over the internet in every digital forum that this is the case. Here, we enjoy our CRT, be they old, heavy, and however else you want to describe them as.
If you want to stage a shootout between digital and CRT, I'm all for that, but to come in here and claim that all CRTers need their eyesight checked, along with your 'heh heh' comments, those comments simply aren't welcome.
You have been warned. |
Read the topic of this tread!
Since this is a CRT forum the topic of this tread is the absolute thruth so help me god?
When people writhe this kind of dreamscenario treads it shold be allowed to come in and say, hey this is not right as I have tested these mods and it is not true. Or shall we just take Greg Eisemanns word of it and belive it to be true? That is not fair to the customer he is trying to fool with these kind if statements. We have tested this side by side many times and with different modefications from Greg Eisemann and yes there has beeen a slight improovement on the CRT, but not by much.
And I like to make this kinds of thests as I see it to be the only way to see different projectors and how they perform against each other.
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
Last edited by Andreas21 on Mon Mar 16, 2015 8:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
