| Author |
Message |
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thewolfman wrote: | | barclay66 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | Here we go again, doing sharpness comparisons.. |
The greatest joke of all:
- A screenshot is posted (presumably from a CRT projector)
- The picture is posted in JPG format
- Everyone seems to have forgotten that JPG isn't a lossless format
- Compression artifacts are misinterpreted as pixels
- Picture is identified as digital projector screenshot
BTW: Even if the picture was saved using a lossles format it still could have pixel-like structures due to the resolution limits of the digital camera used for taking the picture. In order to compare a FullHD-Picture with the ablility to distinguish a digital projection from a CRT the camera would need at least four times that resolution (> 8Mpixel) and an optimum alignment versus the screen...
Regards,
barclay66
P.S. and my conclusion:
For me it only matters if I like the picture quality that I see. If this is the case, then numbers, brands and features are irrelevant. Makes life much more simple! |
Right, my images are saved as JPEG in Paint - after I selected them from Paintshop where I select the best once, as I have 3 different ways of focusing on my camera and I always shoot at least 3 of each: One that focus in on tiny things, one that focus in on a larger box in the middle and one that focus in on the overall image. For the most part I go with the middle box kind. And there could be some compression artefacts that could give them a digital touch to it, but I never thought about it until recently when innuendos were being tossed around.
Why I move them over to Paint is because I want to re-size them to 1800 pix width easy. |
What you do with the picture I don't care. But should not be fixed and not to digital pixels.
The only way to show that this is a Crt is by standing in the picture. On a digital you will get black shadow and on Crt you guys know.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thewolfman wrote: | A bit lazy to steal someone else's just to get the rush of seeing me post the same thing, don't you think? Well, I do. You got to at least post some of your own to make it interesting.
Digital vs CRT screenie thread? |
If I fint the time to set up my camera I will post the same screenshot from American Psyko as you did and it will be from the JVC X500. Then it will be the absolute last screenshot I post. 
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thewolfman
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | | thewolfman wrote: | | barclay66 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Here we go again, doing sharpness comparisons.. |
The greatest joke of all:
- A screenshot is posted (presumably from a CRT projector)
- The picture is posted in JPG format
- Everyone seems to have forgotten that JPG isn't a lossless format
- Compression artifacts are misinterpreted as pixels
- Picture is identified as digital projector screenshot
BTW: Even if the picture was saved using a lossles format it still could have pixel-like structures due to the resolution limits of the digital camera used for taking the picture. In order to compare a FullHD-Picture with the ablility to distinguish a digital projection from a CRT the camera would need at least four times that resolution (> 8Mpixel) and an optimum alignment versus the screen...
Regards,
barclay66
P.S. and my conclusion:
For me it only matters if I like the picture quality that I see. If this is the case, then numbers, brands and features are irrelevant. Makes life much more simple! |
Right, my images are saved as JPEG in Paint - after I selected them from Paintshop where I select the best once, as I have 3 different ways of focusing on my camera and I always shoot at least 3 of each: One that focus in on tiny things, one that focus in on a larger box in the middle and one that focus in on the overall image. For the most part I go with the middle box kind. And there could be some compression artefacts that could give them a digital touch to it, but I never thought about it until recently when innuendos were being tossed around.
Why I move them over to Paint is because I want to re-size them to 1800 pix width easy. |
What you do with the picture I don't care. But should not be fixed and not to digital pixels.
The only way to show that this is a Crt is by standing in the picture. On a digital you will get black shadow and on Crt you guys know. |
No one is being dishonest here, that I know of, so there is no reason to react and feel like the way you are. We are just posting images, like any other, and now we would like to see some of yours too. You do a lot of talking it seems - but do you post images? No!
Good point about being in the picture, I'm not going to of course, but can for the hell of it put something else in there to suit your dying need to know.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok one Lucy pic at 1920 pixels. Personally I think the picture is to big but to compare with the others I try.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The info on the pic. This was exported to 1920 pixels times something in jpg. Then uploaded to tinypic and what they do I do not know.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Last edited by redfox001 on Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:29 pm; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thewolfman
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
With all do respect, that's a very good example of pixelated image as well - look at the nose and you'll see that there is artefacts there to.. and yeah, it seem just as pixalated as mine does. What a surprise for the Norwegian that must be, because now there's 2 of us passing digital screenies for CRT. Will there be more coming? The plot thickens.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thewolfman wrote: | | With all do respect, that's a very good example of pixelated image as well - look at the nose and you'll see that there is artefacts there to.. and yeah, it seem just as pixalated as mine does. What a surprise for the Norwegian that must be, because now there's 2 of us passing digital screenies for CRT. Will there be more coming? The plot thickens. |
I think it is a great compliment if he does not believe it is CRT. Shows he does not know the better CRT's.
This is my pic in 1500 pixels.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seems tinypic turns it in to 1600x1200. So my 1920 is not 1920 I guess.
This is exported in full size not much different.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thewolfman
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe the Avatar pix was shot with a really good DSLR which has an impact on the finished product when it's downsized and all?
I forgot if he did but it does looks sick to me and the best I've seen I think. Still, it's cartoon and that always look great.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you want to see sharpness buy a 4k television and turn the sharpness to 50 % you will see every detail in the face enhanced en it looks like the people are all very old and wrinkled. No kidding. When you turn the sharpness to 0% nothing remains and you see a not so good picture. These JVC's generally do not turn the sharpness to 0% and what I see is enhanced sharpness. It doe not look bad though. I prefer no enhancements at all.
By the way I do not see pixellation but perhaps that is because I am looking with a retina macbook screen? If your screen is 1080p it might show pixels? Just a guess
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElTopo
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1640
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Guys,
would you please stop posting screenshots of digital (CRT) projectors 
ElTopo
_________________
Barco Cine 9 the one and only
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thewolfman
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's a good point about the monitor.. maybe that's it. I'm using 1080p right now but it is a 1200p from 2003 I think. HP2335.
I'll crank it up to 1200p some time and see if it goes away.. it's just that whenever the pj is hooked up to the pc 1200p goes away and get stuck with only 1080p. But I'll try and remember that for sure.
(I see pixels in my cartoon image as well, btw).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thewolfman
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Your right Eltopo. It got out of hand and OT. Sorry! 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He I looked up your camera it is a dsc w320 14,1 MP. Nice camera you found.
Where do you host your images? Tinypic?
The digital has no camera info.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElTopo
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1640
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My Barco Cine 9
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
79.57 KB |
| Viewed: |
1487 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
69.19 KB |
| Viewed: |
1487 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
73.29 KB |
| Viewed: |
1487 Time(s) |
|
_________________
Barco Cine 9 the one and only
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice shots but to impress even more you have to have a camera where you can set the iso low (low electronic amplification) and the focus somewhere in between and the exposure like 1 second or longer. You need a camera holder for that.
One thing that is really faked in all screenshot is the dynamic. With CRT you can make the exposure like 2 seconds and get an enormous amount of light and still see deep black on the photo. But when you watch in person your iris will open up with the dimmer light and the effect is perhaps the same.
I have a simple canon powershot 8 mpx Wolfman has a normal Sony Cyber-shot not even that expensive 
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ElTopo wrote: | | My Barco Cine 9 |
This I see and know is a cine 9.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mine is a Cine 9 too.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Her Lucy at her worst. Just awake...
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2015 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
some smaller
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
