|
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 |
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | Do you also calibrate your CRT by eye?? |
I also calibrate by eye.
Write this down:
When you use the word Calibrate, you are assuming that it means to properly calibrate a display system using a meter of such. But in the industry I'm in, it means nothing.
The proper use of the word calibrate would be immediately followed by means, type and equipment used.
So If a did a calibration, it would read more like:
Calibration performed on (display device - make model serial) - using (any equipment used /make model calibration date) - also followed by results (previous numbers and end result numbers) - person
And to also enlighten you on something. Yes, an eyeball calibration is a valid calibration. It would have to be entered as such (calibrated by eye).
My reference for the above is also what has been established by NIST. A Federal Government Agency that sets and documents US Standards. And most of the industry follows those standards.
So on the eyeball thing, believe it or not, the brain is the calibrator. And that is why most expert calibrators ALSO use an Optical Comparator
I hope you wrote that down, because you really should never use the word calibration without attaching the means and method |
So what you say here is that you can get results to match bt 709 With using your eyes?? 
You better write this Down: It is impossible to calibrate accurate to the standards by eye!
If you want an accurate picture close to what is on the BD you can not do it by eye. What you do in your work has nothing to do with this. If you think a pro calibrator calibrating for HT and comercial Cinema can do this by eye and get good results you are so far out in fantasy land it is possible to go.
And this also explains why Chris Tucker looks like an Indian in your screenshots, it is because you do your calibration by eye. What do your brain say about Dela E after you eye calibration?? Do you even know what Delta E numbers mean?
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HogPilot wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | Do you also calibrate your CRT by eye?? |
I also calibrate by eye.
Write this down:
When you use the word Calibrate, you are assuming that it means to properly calibrate a display system using a meter of such. But in the industry I'm in, it means nothing.
The proper use of the word calibrate would be immediately followed by means, type and equipment used.
So If a did a calibration, it would read more like:
Calibration performed on (display device - make model serial) - using (any equipment used /make model calibration date) - also followed by results (previous numbers and end result numbers) - person - date of calibration
And to also enlighten you on something. Yes, an eyeball calibration is a valid calibration. It would have to be entered as such (calibrated by eye).
My reference for the above is also what has been established by NIST. A Federal Government Agency that sets and documents US Standards. And most of the industry follows those standards.
So on the eyeball thing, believe it or not, the brain is the calibrator. And that is why most expert calibrators ALSO use an Optical Comparator
I hope you wrote that down, because you really should never use the word calibration without attaching the means and method |
A calibration by eye is only a valid calibration if an approved D65 light source and optical comparator are used. Otherwise, at best, you're going by memory which is an absolutely horrible reference; this has been thoroughly tested, proven, and documented.
Which approved D65 light source and comparators do you use for your by-eye calibration, and what were the results? Specifically dE at the primaries and secondaries at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% luminance, and your 10% - 100% (10% increments) greyscale dE's and point gamma values? |
+100 
_________________
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: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HogPilot wrote: |
A calibration by eye is only a valid calibration if an approved D65 light source and optical comparator are used. Otherwise, at best, you're going by memory which is an absolutely horrible reference; this has been thoroughly tested, proven, and documented.
Which approved D65 light source and comparators do you use for your by-eye calibration? |
I use a TVS Pro.
But to say that an eyeball calibration without an D65 source is not an eyeball calibration is not true, because a many manufacturer used the "by Eye' method in their manuals. Is it an accurate measurement, no. Because it goes against the Standards of verifying the calibration, but to say it is not documented as exceptable is not true
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: |
So what you have been stating about your X500 and its perfect rec 709 is just guessing, as you have no clue if its just a illusion your given when measuring low resolution windows.?
Or will you be able to target a single pixel on your screen and confirm it to be calculated/ corrected right on a complex movie content while playing with the super duper hanky panky expensive Klein.? |
What are you saying here?
When we calibrate we use 1080p signal generators and the hanky panky expensive Klein (witch is the best colorimeter on the market) measures from a 1080p source. And I use pro calibrators to calibrate my displays as one of the most important thing in calibration toghether with good equipment, is experience. I would never buy the equpment my pro calibrators use just to calibrate my own equipment, but I would not use poor equipment to calibrate it myself either.
You can also get 4K signal generator to calibrate 4K displays.
I dont have to know every detail about my digital to know this.  |
Then my question about the cms device pop up again.
Can it remap/ correct each pixel real time in full 1080P? and when using a generator, how do you know that its the same as your source.?
You have at least 3 processors in your video chain, 2 of them have cms features, who corrects, remaps the information entering.
When you calibrate you only use a low resolution window on your screen, how do you know what these processors and cms devices do to your high resolution part of the image ?
Can you measure 1 pixel on your screen with mixed content around it, and confirm its right on target/ true to the source.?
And do you use DI and e shift when running your JVC.? |
Since you are the calibration expert in here you tell me.
And regarding your question of measuring 1 pixel, what do you think?
And when you calibrate your CRT by eye, how do you confirm it to be true to the source? |
This is not about the CRT, none of us claimed a perfect rec 709.
This is refering back to the coment about the shin texture and colors looking 1 color alike and muted compared to the CRT projector, stuff we notice when comparing a good CRT against new digital projectors.
That resolution must get lost somewhere, it has nothing to do with MTF ansi as we know thats very bad on the CRT compared to the digital, but why do the digitals always look like the colors are muted/ flat, like a low bandwidth CRT projector.
When you calibrate, i guess your using a low resolution window, maybe a 3-10P resolution, how do you translate that to a 1080P resolution, and confirm it not to get messed up in the processing.?
Ill guess the processor says.. woohoo,, the idiot is feeding me just 1 color, very low resolution,, thats easy, hope he dont check me out with movie content.
What good is a 7000$ meter if you cant measure what goes on with high resolution content.? |
Your problem when not calibrating your CRT to bt709 is that it does not show bt709, if you did it would look close to the digital. The X500 does not have muted colors it is the CRT that is not showing bt709 correctly.
If you are so obsessed with accuracy why do you calibrate your CRT by eye?
And I still say you have no idea what color resolution is.
And how do you measure your CRT with 1080p resolution when it is not capable of showing it correctly? |
Ok now my CRT is calibrated to rec 709.
I use a 5P resolution window and a klein. How do that calibration transfer into a 1080P resolution with movie content ?
My calibration is done with a resolution 216 times lower than my source will be able to output, or 216 lines who display the same information on a 1080 line display.
And i dont have any CMS device who need to recalculate,/ remap each pixel.
Is it possible that ill have a more linear calibration result inside my bandwidth limitation, than a setup with 2 CMS processors in series, who is depending on firmware, and have to calculate/ remap each pixel ?
Last edited by stridsvognen on Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:37 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HogPilot
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383
TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | HogPilot wrote: |
A calibration by eye is only a valid calibration if an approved D65 light source and optical comparator are used. Otherwise, at best, you're going by memory which is an absolutely horrible reference; this has been thoroughly tested, proven, and documented.
Which approved D65 light source and comparators do you use for your by-eye calibration? |
I use a TVS Pro.
But to say that an eyeball calibration using a non-D65 light source is not an eyeball calibration is not true, because a many manufacturer used the "by Eye' method in their manuals. Is it an accurate measurement, no. Because it goes against the Standards of verifying the calibration, but to say it is not documented as exceptable is not true |
You'll have to forgive me, I'm not familiar with the TVS Pro. A link would be helpful.
And an optical comparator calibration using an other-than D65 light source is a calibration to something other than D65 - you're simply matching the display to the white point of that light source. It defeats the entire purpose of calibrating if you're not doing it to accepted (excepted means something else) standards, especially if your white point is wrong. Proper white point is the basis on which everything else rests.
So in terms of calibrating to accepted video standards, I'd say your method is certainly excepted! 
_________________
| ecrabb wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure. |
He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.
SC |
Last edited by HogPilot on Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:42 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: |
So what you have been stating about your X500 and its perfect rec 709 is just guessing, as you have no clue if its just a illusion your given when measuring low resolution windows.?
Or will you be able to target a single pixel on your screen and confirm it to be calculated/ corrected right on a complex movie content while playing with the super duper hanky panky expensive Klein.? |
What are you saying here?
When we calibrate we use 1080p signal generators and the hanky panky expensive Klein (witch is the best colorimeter on the market) measures from a 1080p source. And I use pro calibrators to calibrate my displays as one of the most important thing in calibration toghether with good equipment, is experience. I would never buy the equpment my pro calibrators use just to calibrate my own equipment, but I would not use poor equipment to calibrate it myself either.
You can also get 4K signal generator to calibrate 4K displays.
I dont have to know every detail about my digital to know this. |
Then my question about the cms device pop up again.
Can it remap/ correct each pixel real time in full 1080P? and when using a generator, how do you know that its the same as your source.?
You have at least 3 processors in your video chain, 2 of them have cms features, who corrects, remaps the information entering.
When you calibrate you only use a low resolution window on your screen, how do you know what these processors and cms devices do to your high resolution part of the image ?
Can you measure 1 pixel on your screen with mixed content around it, and confirm its right on target/ true to the source.?
And do you use DI and e shift when running your JVC.? |
Since you are the calibration expert in here you tell me.
And regarding your question of measuring 1 pixel, what do you think?
And when you calibrate your CRT by eye, how do you confirm it to be true to the source? |
This is not about the CRT, none of us claimed a perfect rec 709.
This is refering back to the coment about the shin texture and colors looking 1 color alike and muted compared to the CRT projector, stuff we notice when comparing a good CRT against new digital projectors.
That resolution must get lost somewhere, it has nothing to do with MTF ansi as we know thats very bad on the CRT compared to the digital, but why do the digitals always look like the colors are muted/ flat, like a low bandwidth CRT projector.
When you calibrate, i guess your using a low resolution window, maybe a 3-10P resolution, how do you translate that to a 1080P resolution, and confirm it not to get messed up in the processing.?
Ill guess the processor says.. woohoo,, the idiot is feeding me just 1 color, very low resolution,, thats easy, hope he dont check me out with movie content.
What good is a 7000$ meter if you cant measure what goes on with high resolution content.? |
Your problem when not calibrating your CRT to bt709 is that it does not show bt709, if you did it would look close to the digital. The X500 does not have muted colors it is the CRT that is not showing bt709 correctly.
If you are so obsessed with accuracy why do you calibrate your CRT by eye?
And I still say you have no idea what color resolution is.
And how do you measure your CRT with 1080p resolution when it is not capable of showing it correctly? |
Ok now my CRT is calibrated to rec 709.
I use a 5P resolution window and a klein. How do that calibration transfer into a 1080P image on a movie.?
And i dont have any CMS device who need to recalculate,/ remap each pixel.
Is it possible that ill have a more linear calibration result inside my bandwidth limitation, than a setup with 2 CMS processors in series, who is depending on firmware, and have to calculate/ remap each pixel ? |
What is your point with all this bull?
The very limited calibration system in your CRT is of corse much better than anything else and when you calibrate it by eye you get delta E numbers below 1 and have totally linear gamma response and perfect grayscale for sure.
If you really think your CRT is better than any digital except ansi/intrascene contrast and MTF, we just leave it with that.
You are so narrow sighted and the definition of a Fanboy this is meaningless.
If you guys really think calibration by eye with your belowed CRT is the wholy grail, so be it. I am sure it is not.
_________________
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: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
It has seen better days, but it's still my buddy and help even when using the meter and PC methods
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: |
So what you have been stating about your X500 and its perfect rec 709 is just guessing, as you have no clue if its just a illusion your given when measuring low resolution windows.?
Or will you be able to target a single pixel on your screen and confirm it to be calculated/ corrected right on a complex movie content while playing with the super duper hanky panky expensive Klein.? |
What are you saying here?
When we calibrate we use 1080p signal generators and the hanky panky expensive Klein (witch is the best colorimeter on the market) measures from a 1080p source. And I use pro calibrators to calibrate my displays as one of the most important thing in calibration toghether with good equipment, is experience. I would never buy the equpment my pro calibrators use just to calibrate my own equipment, but I would not use poor equipment to calibrate it myself either.
You can also get 4K signal generator to calibrate 4K displays.
I dont have to know every detail about my digital to know this. |
Then my question about the cms device pop up again.
Can it remap/ correct each pixel real time in full 1080P? and when using a generator, how do you know that its the same as your source.?
You have at least 3 processors in your video chain, 2 of them have cms features, who corrects, remaps the information entering.
When you calibrate you only use a low resolution window on your screen, how do you know what these processors and cms devices do to your high resolution part of the image ?
Can you measure 1 pixel on your screen with mixed content around it, and confirm its right on target/ true to the source.?
And do you use DI and e shift when running your JVC.? |
Since you are the calibration expert in here you tell me.
And regarding your question of measuring 1 pixel, what do you think?
And when you calibrate your CRT by eye, how do you confirm it to be true to the source? |
This is not about the CRT, none of us claimed a perfect rec 709.
This is refering back to the coment about the shin texture and colors looking 1 color alike and muted compared to the CRT projector, stuff we notice when comparing a good CRT against new digital projectors.
That resolution must get lost somewhere, it has nothing to do with MTF ansi as we know thats very bad on the CRT compared to the digital, but why do the digitals always look like the colors are muted/ flat, like a low bandwidth CRT projector.
When you calibrate, i guess your using a low resolution window, maybe a 3-10P resolution, how do you translate that to a 1080P resolution, and confirm it not to get messed up in the processing.?
Ill guess the processor says.. woohoo,, the idiot is feeding me just 1 color, very low resolution,, thats easy, hope he dont check me out with movie content.
What good is a 7000$ meter if you cant measure what goes on with high resolution content.? |
Your problem when not calibrating your CRT to bt709 is that it does not show bt709, if you did it would look close to the digital. The X500 does not have muted colors it is the CRT that is not showing bt709 correctly.
If you are so obsessed with accuracy why do you calibrate your CRT by eye?
And I still say you have no idea what color resolution is.
And how do you measure your CRT with 1080p resolution when it is not capable of showing it correctly? |
Ok now my CRT is calibrated to rec 709.
I use a 5P resolution window and a klein. How do that calibration transfer into a 1080P image on a movie.?
And i dont have any CMS device who need to recalculate,/ remap each pixel.
Is it possible that ill have a more linear calibration result inside my bandwidth limitation, than a setup with 2 CMS processors in series, who is depending on firmware, and have to calculate/ remap each pixel ? |
What is your point with all this bull?
The very limited calibration system in your CRT is of corse much better than anything else and when you calibrate it by eye you get delta E numbers below 1 and have totally linear gamma response and perfect grayscale for sure.
If you really think your CRT is better than any digital except ansi/intrascene contrast and MTF, we just leave it with that.
You are so narrow sighted and the definition of a Fanboy this is meaningless.
If you guys really think calibration by eye with your belowed CRT is the wholy grail, so be it. I am sure it is not. |
You dont get the point do you.?
What good is your fancy meter when using a very very low resolution window when you measure, and then count on 2 cms devices in series to be able to remap/ calculate each pixel in real time without any error, or shortcuts.?
Your movie content is a very very complex pixel structure who is all over the map, and you claim that calibrating a low resolution window will tell you that what you see on screen is true to the source material.? (rec709)
The reason we dont need advanced 21 point grayscale and 25x25x25 3D lut and so on is the nature of the CRT, and is it possible that it might be a very nice not to depend on software and calculations when trying to resolve a HD source.?
Yeah we might not care if the delta E is not spot on, as its not as important as with digital, as we dont have those rapid shifts on the gamma curve as digitals can have.
How many crt projectors have you calibrated, and how many digital projectors have you manually calibrated to perfection ?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HogPilot
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383
TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | It has seen better days, but it's still my buddy and help even when using the meter and PC methods |
I was looking for more of an informational link, but yes you're right, it's definitely seen better days. When is the last time you sent that in to have it certified? Edit: Sorry, also forgot to ask - what type of probe is that? Colorimeter? Spectroradiometer? Something else?
And you said that results were a critical part of a calibration - you seem to have omitted my request for results when you quoted me last. Maybe you just missed it. What are the results of your most recent calibration as I originally requested?
Given that you have no more comments about my assessment of other-than D65 optical light sources for calibration (or worse yet, no light source at all), I'll assume you agree with me about the worthlessness of such an exercise.
_________________
| ecrabb wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure. |
He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.
SC |
Last edited by HogPilot on Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: |
If you really think your CRT is better than any digital except ansi/intrascene contrast and MTF, we just leave it with that |
Does that mean you'll be leaving and trolling somewhere else...oh gawd Andy, we're surely going to miss you when you go..lol
| Quote: |
If you guys really think calibration by eye with your belowed CRT is the wholy grail, so be it. I am sure it is not. |
You're like an empty glass with a lid on it, that thinks its full. Regardless of what we tell you, you keep saying the same things over and over.
We're not saying CRT is better. Please lift the lid and let something get in.. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
If you really think your CRT is better than any digital except ansi/intrascene contrast and MTF, we just leave it with that |
Does that mean you'll be leaving and trolling somewhere else...oh gawd Andy, we're surely going to miss you when you go..lol
| Quote: |
If you guys really think calibration by eye with your belowed CRT is the wholy grail, so be it. I am sure it is not. |
You're like an empty glass with a lid on it, that thinks its full. Regardless of what we tell you, you keep saying the same things over and over.
We're not saying CRT is better. Please lift the lid and let something get in.. |
I am not leaving you yet.
I was commenting on your by eye calibration. And yes, you have said it many times that yout CRT will wipe the floor with any digital, but maby you meant something else than it is better.
I think you need to have a look in the Mirror!
_________________
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: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HogPilot wrote: |
Given that you have no more comments about my assessment of other-than D65 optical light sources for calibration (or worse yet, no light source at all), I'll assume you agree with me about the worthlessness of such an exercise. |
I would not agree that it is worthless. I would agree that it's not an accurate means, but not worthless. I used the term previously of "get by" meaning it'll do until later.
This is when I've had to repair a display system, but had to use a get by method of calibration, because of the time allowed. The person who maintained to site would later come in, or come in on their next maintenance visit and do the full calibration. A setup of such could have up to 8 displays involved. At the point of repairing one of them, an calibration to only one of them would throw the rest of them off. And to get them all calibrated properly could take up to a week. So we all used to get by method, meaning an by eye calibration that used the other screens for an reference.
Things are a lot different in the commercial world, and it depends on the equipment and systems in use.
Again, the Optical Comparator is also used. I used a PC probe they provided. I also have one
Oh, I don't do HT calibrations. Only repairs and setups
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | HogPilot wrote: |
Given that you have no more comments about my assessment of other-than D65 optical light sources for calibration (or worse yet, no light source at all), I'll assume you agree with me about the worthlessness of such an exercise. |
I would not agree that it is worthless. I would agree that it's not an accurate means, but not worthless. I used the term previously of "get by" meaning it'll do until later.
This is when I've had to repair a display system, but had to use a get by method of calibration, because of the time allowed. The person who maintained to site would later come in, or come in on their next maintenance visit and do the full calibration. A setup of such could have up to 8 displays involved. At the point of repairing one of them, an calibration to only one of them would throw the rest of them off. And to get them all calibrated properly could take up to a week. So we all used to get by method, meaning an by eye calibration that used the other screens for an reference.
Things are a lot different in the commercial world, and it depends on the equipment and systems in use.
Again, the Optical Comparator is also used. I used a PC probe they provided. I also have one
Oh, I don't do HT calibrations. Only repairs and setups |
You calibrate your own HT by eye and I am sure you get very accurate results.
What you do in your work is totally irellevant in this discussion.
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: |
How many crt projectors have you calibrated, and how many digital projectors have you manually calibrated to perfection ? |
None!
As I know two different pro calibrators with high end equipment and long experience, and I could never get the results they can, and I would never buy the equipment they have as it is to expensive for personal use.
I am sure you have great experience and have calibrated hundreds of projectors.
_________________
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: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: |
And yes, you have said it many times that yout CRT will wipe the floor with any digital |
And how many time have you and you said your JVC is better than CRT, and referred to CRT as being dead, etc?
I have a customer that sometimes visit this site. He is a well recognized person in the DC political arena. He purchase an 8" Marquee (8500AC) projector from me about ten years ago. He also uses this projector on a 10 foot wide screen.
I must have re-tubed this projector maybe 4 times in those ten years. And because he is not a person to swap a board or two, I told him it would be best if he was to start looking at the digitals, because I also told him I don't think it would be a good idea to put tubes in that projector one more time. I told him that two tube changes ago.
He told me then, what he told me after my last visit to tweak it before his annual Super Bowl party, thay non of the digitals look ready yet. I told him this last time to look at the JVC's. he told me he had. They just don't have the look he's getting with CRT. I've tried to get him to move on, and with $$ not being an issue for him. I think there is something about that 8" projector shooting on his 10 foot wide screen, in that not do dark room 9light coming through the curtains) that he does not want to part with it.
now, I'm thinking because he has a turntable that cost about what you'll pay for a car, he just may be an analog person. So on my last visit, I came to understand why he don't want to part with that 22 year old CRT projector. He's an analog guy. He also said, he can't stand the sound on CD's.
So not everybody is interested in the latest and greatest new fangled technology, And not everyone is caught up into having a brighter and sharper image.
Get my drift..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: |
You calibrate your own HT by eye and I am sure you get very accurate results.
What you do in your work is totally irellevant in this discussion. |
Poor Andy. I think a calibration could do you well. You need to have that lid removed.
Did I say I calibrated my HT by eye?
I have a probe Andy...write that down
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | HogPilot wrote: |
Given that you have no more comments about my assessment of other-than D65 optical light sources for calibration (or worse yet, no light source at all), I'll assume you agree with me about the worthlessness of such an exercise. |
I would not agree that it is worthless. I would agree that it's not an accurate means, but not worthless. I used the term previously of "get by" meaning it'll do until later.
This is when I've had to repair a display system, but had to use a get by method of calibration, because of the time allowed. The person who maintained to site would later come in, or come in on their next maintenance visit and do the full calibration. A setup of such could have up to 8 displays involved. At the point of repairing one of them, an calibration to only one of them would throw the rest of them off. And to get them all calibrated properly could take up to a week. So we all used to get by method, meaning an by eye calibration that used the other screens for an reference.
Things are a lot different in the commercial world, and it depends on the equipment and systems in use.
Again, the Optical Comparator is also used. I used a PC probe they provided. I also have one
Oh, I don't do HT calibrations. Only repairs and setups |
You calibrate your own HT by eye and I am sure you get very accurate results.
What you do in your work is totally irellevant in this discussion. |
You dont get the point do you.?
What good is your fancy meter when using a very very low resolution window when you measure, and then count on 2 cms devices in series to be able to remap/ calculate each pixel in real time without any error, or shortcuts.?
Your movie content is a very very complex pixel structure who is all over the map, and you claim that calibrating a low resolution window will tell you that what you see on screen is true to the source material.? (rec709)
The reason we dont need advanced 21 point grayscale and 25x25x25 3D lut and so on is the nature of the CRT, and is it possible that it might be a very nice not to depend on software and calculations when trying to resolve a HD source.?
Yeah we might not care if the delta E is not spot on, as its not as important as with digital, as we dont have those rapid shifts on the gamma curve as digitals can have.
Do your digital video chain have the power/ speed/ bandwidth to do all the remapping/ calculations right, and stay true to the low resolution calibration, when displaying movie content.?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
You calibrate your own HT by eye and I am sure you get very accurate results.
What you do in your work is totally irellevant in this discussion. |
Poor Andy. I think a calibration could do you well. You need to have that lid removed.
Did I say I calibrated my HT by eye?
I have a probe Andy...write that down |
Yes, you have said you calibrat by eye or do you have something we Call it here in Noway, goldfish memory?
What kind of probe is that, the one you posted is so old I could not find any info one the internet, maby it is from before the internet? What kind of colorimeter, spectroradiometer and signal generator do you use when you calibrate?
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HogPilot
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383
TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | HogPilot wrote: |
Given that you have no more comments about my assessment of other-than D65 optical light sources for calibration (or worse yet, no light source at all), I'll assume you agree with me about the worthlessness of such an exercise. |
I would not agree that it is worthless. I would agree that it's not an accurate means, but not worthless. I used the term previously of "get by" meaning it'll do until later.
This is when I've had to repair a display system, but had to use a get by method of calibration, because of the time allowed. The person who maintained to site would later come in, or come in on their next maintenance visit and do the full calibration. A setup of such could have up to 8 displays involved. At the point of repairing one of them, an calibration to only one of them would throw the rest of them off. And to get them all calibrated properly could take up to a week. So we all used to get by method, meaning an by eye calibration that used the other screens for an reference. |
Given that this discussion has centered on video fidelity, it's worthless for that purpose. Accurate calibration - i.e. not by memory/eye alone - is central to the whole debate of comparing displays in the first place (caveat: I still hold that screen shots are an almost worthless endeavor for that purpose, outside of a handful of very specific items). Despite it being completely irrelevant to this discussion, you continue to bring it up. It's proven to be nothing more than an obfuscatory subject. Let's move on to more relevant, productive topics.
Oddly you seem to keep missing or avoiding my requests for information about your projector calibration, and how recently your probe has been certified. Both are incredibly germane to this discussion, especially if you're going to continue to insist that anyone's shots prove anything. Which they don't, at all.
_________________
| ecrabb wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure. |
He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.
SC |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 18, 2015 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | HogPilot wrote: |
Given that you have no more comments about my assessment of other-than D65 optical light sources for calibration (or worse yet, no light source at all), I'll assume you agree with me about the worthlessness of such an exercise. |
I would not agree that it is worthless. I would agree that it's not an accurate means, but not worthless. I used the term previously of "get by" meaning it'll do until later.
This is when I've had to repair a display system, but had to use a get by method of calibration, because of the time allowed. The person who maintained to site would later come in, or come in on their next maintenance visit and do the full calibration. A setup of such could have up to 8 displays involved. At the point of repairing one of them, an calibration to only one of them would throw the rest of them off. And to get them all calibrated properly could take up to a week. So we all used to get by method, meaning an by eye calibration that used the other screens for an reference.
Things are a lot different in the commercial world, and it depends on the equipment and systems in use.
Again, the Optical Comparator is also used. I used a PC probe they provided. I also have one
Oh, I don't do HT calibrations. Only repairs and setups |
You calibrate your own HT by eye and I am sure you get very accurate results.
What you do in your work is totally irellevant in this discussion. |
You dont get the point do you.?
What good is your fancy meter when using a very very low resolution window when you measure, and then count on 2 cms devices in series to be able to remap/ calculate each pixel in real time without any error, or shortcuts.?
Your movie content is a very very complex pixel structure who is all over the map, and you claim that calibrating a low resolution window will tell you that what you see on screen is true to the source material.? (rec709)
The reason we dont need advanced 21 point grayscale and 25x25x25 3D lut and so on is the nature of the CRT, and is it possible that it might be a very nice not to depend on software and calculations when trying to resolve a HD source.?
Yeah we might not care if the delta E is not spot on, as its not as important as with digital, as we dont have those rapid shifts on the gamma curve as digitals can have.
Do your digital video chain have the power/ speed/ bandwidth to do all the remapping/ calculations right, and stay true to the low resolution calibration, when displaying movie content.? |
I get the point, but you dont have any calibration experience so everything you say here is worthless.
What you actually are saying is all calibration of a digital display with an internal or external CMS it totally worthless.
Why dont you send a mail to Spectracal a tell them all this , so they can stop this bull**** they are doing??
Maby you should also tell every manufacturer of digital projectors to stop and go over to CRT as it clearly the inferiour technology??
I have said it before and I will say it again, digitals are the future, CRTs are the past. And this is reality, face it!
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| 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
|
|
