|
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 |
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | ecrabb wrote: |
Look at THIS photo and tell us what's wrong with it...
<closeup removed>
SC |
What I see in this photo, is exactly what I see in the other photo. be mindful that I did also mention this photo. And also before you continue to piss out more unfounded theory, know that we do use camera's for this, and the camera can be fairly true to the image.... but that's IF THE IMAGE HAS NOT BEEN SHARPENED. |
What "unfounded theory" have I "pissed out", Mike?
What exactly do you do with the phones with respect to large-screen projection? Specifics, please.
You're clearly not the only one here with design- and hands-on experience with large, high-end projection systems, or the tools that make them work, so please stop acting like you're the resident expert on all things projection. While you've no doubt probably forgotten more about CRT projectors than I'll ever know, we can't all be experts on everything, so I have a lot of experience you don't. When it comes to CG/digital image processing as related to projection, I think we're probably much more on par, having even worked with a few of the same people. In other areas, like digital cameras and image processing as it relates to photography, I think I probably have an advantage. Again, we can't all be experts on everything.
BTW, you never answered my question from a few days ago about which Sony projector it was in the sub simulator.
Regards,
SC
Last edited by ecrabb on Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:30 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: Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
And you donīt answer my questions: If you look at the rest of the testpattern and compare the VW1000 with stridsvognens CRT witch shows the testpattern most correct??
And when can we see the same pattern from your CRT?? |
It's really hard to tell, but what I can tell you is, if you're going to scale 1080P to native 4K, you should read the manual of your Sony and look for an adjustment like: Pixel Phase, pixel timing, pixel shift or something along those lines. and if you don't see anything there, contact Sony and ask (because it could be in a hidden menu). Because the importance of scaling up on high end digital, is the ability to juggle the pixel structure. there should be something that would allow you to do so. Because that alignment is what is needed to make the image really perform to it's best.
And when and if you find that adjustment, you can use your phone (because you may not have the proper test pattern) to get a better image. |
So you donīt think Sony would have perfected the phase and timing on this high end projector? |
No, because nobody has, not even on the very expensive Barco, DPI and Christie Digital's. They all have it. And it's even on the Commercial Sony 4K ($120,000 i think??)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: |
What exactly do you do with the phones with respect to large-screen projection? Specifics, please?
You're clearly not the only one here with design- and hands-on experience with large, high-end projection systems, or the tools that make them work, so please stop acting like you're the resident expert on all things projection. While you've no doubt probably forgotten more about CRT projectors than I'll ever know, we can't all be experts on everything, so I have a lot of experience you don't. When it comes to CG/digital image processing as related to projection, I think we're probably much more on par, having even worked with a few of the same people. In other areas, like digital cameras and image processing as it relates to photography, I think I probably have an advantage. Again, we can't all be experts on everything.
BTW, you never answered my question from a few days ago about which Sony projector it was in the sub simulator.
Regards,
SC |
I never claimed to be an expert, I only responded to things I know as fact, and what I myself have seen and expereinced. when you were in the industry dealing directly with the same displays at the time, the resolution was limited. nothing was really above 1280X1024..
Since then, the industry has changed tremendously with the higher resolutions, especially anything up to 1920 horizontal lines. We've found out that the math can not always work in the actual application. and we also had bigger struggles dealing with blending and/in processors. meaning that it became very difficult to make a blend system conform to the test patterns, which in some cases was the rule to determine when the system was properly setup. And the very expensive processors did not always make things better in every case.
Now, what I was saying concerning the image on the screen, is also what happens inside a blend processor when dealing with these rates. And that is why it is hard to find a blend setup that would do that pattern structure or any or the conforming test patterns. And that is because of what happens when processing away from native rate of the source signal. The higher the rate, the more difficult it becomes, and the more you'll need to juggle the pixel structure.
I'll call about the Sony...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ecrab.
Ill try ask you again.. Wich one have the best ability to hold output level at all resolutions.?
Its how it looks on the screen, dont worry about the camera.
Look at the area marked with red.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | Ecrab.
Ill try ask you again.. Wich one have the best ability to hold output level at all resolutions.?
Its how it looks on the screen, dont worry about the camera.
Look at the area marked with red. |
I HAVE to worry about the camera. I can't say (with certainty) by looking at a low-res, questionable-quality screen shot, how faithfully I'm seeing the representation of reality.
However, in this case, it appears as though you've done what I've suggested other times can be offer some value... You've posted two different images of two different projectors, but on the same screen, in the same room, from the same camera... At least there are a few of the main variables controlled! By the same token, two photos from two different cameras, taking in two different rooms, on different screens is of very little value.
To answer your question, it's the first projector (image 0822) whose output is staying linear at high-frequency. Likely 0822 is a digital and 0813 is a CRT. Again, I'm making these educated guesses based on my own knowledge of how different projectors act as much as I'm using the two images. The only reason I'm relying much at all on the two images you posted is because they were taken under fairly controlled circumstances, even if the camera is quite sub-standard. I'd also point out that given the quality of the two images, they're really only good for making very general inferences, and even that is questionable.
I'll try to post a couple of very high-quality screenshots tonight.
SC
PS - What the HELL are all those remote controls for??!?!? 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | Ecrab.
Ill try ask you again.. Wich one have the best ability to hold output level at all resolutions.?
Its how it looks on the screen, dont worry about the camera.
Look at the area marked with red. |
I HAVE to worry about the camera. I can't say (with certainty) by looking at a low-res, questionable-quality screen shot, how faithfully I'm seeing the representation of reality.
However, in this case, it appears as though you've done what I've suggested other times can be offer some value... You've posted two different images of two different projectors, but on the same screen, in the same room, from the same camera... At least there are a few of the main variables controlled! By the same token, two photos from two different cameras, taking in two different rooms, on different screens is of very little value.
To answer your question, it's the first projector (image 0822) whose output is staying linear at high-frequency. Likely 0822 is a digital and 0813 is a CRT. Again, I'm making these educated guesses based on my own knowledge of how different projectors act as much as I'm using the two images. The only reason I'm relying much at all on the two images you posted is because they were taken under fairly controlled circumstances, even if the camera is quite sub-standard. I'd also point out that given the quality of the two images, they're really only good for making very general inferences, and even that is questionable.
I'll try to post a couple of very high-quality screenshots tonight.
SC
PS - What the HELL are all those remote controls for??!?!? |
As i say. its only to evaluate the level output on the resolution pattern nothing else..
Ill love to see the same kind of shot from your JVC..
Then ill tell you what projectors you were looking at.
Remotes.. What remotes.. 
Ahh those.. its one for some of the stuff i have stacked in the corners.. the rest of the remotes are in the sofa and windows. and a stack upstairs..
Those down here are mostly for dvd players and scalers
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here is one explanation of Pixel phase:
Pixel Clock and Phase Guide.
Why this calibration is nessessary.
Pixel phase - An adjustment common to scalers and projectors, which adjusts the point in time that a sample is taken in the A-D conversion process.
The pixel (or dot) clock in a computer and the pixel clock in a display device may operate at the same frequency for a given resolution and refresh rate, but not necessarily in phase with each other.
Pixel phase adjustments are provided on digital monitors and projectors to synchronize the two independent clocks"
A test generator like the Extron VTG 300 includes an alternating pixel pattern, which is used to eliminate banding and shimmering artifacts that are symptomatic of pixel phase error."
My test pattern generator also has a test pattern for this, plus you can download patterns from the bottom of the first page in the link. I can't share the software I use.
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1159544
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | I never claimed to be an expert, I only responded to things I know as fact, and what I myself have seen and expereinced. when you were in the industry dealing directly with the same displays at the time, the resolution was limited. nothing was really above 1280X1024.. |
Ditto. I'm doing the same thing. Obviously our frames of reference are different.
BTW, I haven't been totally out of it for that long. The last couple of setups I was directly involved in were 909's running 1600x1200 from an SGI Origin (with I think 32 processors and 3 or 4 graphics pipes) and another system with Christie 9500 Ultras. So, yeah - it's been well over 10 years since I was working on those systems. But, I stayed up on the hardware and design implementation and was intimately familiar with the design and deployment details on the ISU C6 - both when it was 909-based, and later when they moved to the Sony 4k projectors.
| mp20748 wrote: | | Since then, the industry has changed tremendously with the higher resolutions, especially anything up to 1920 horizontal lines. We've found out that the math can not always work in the actual application. and we also had bigger struggles dealing with blending and/in processors. meaning that it became very difficult to make a blend system conform to the test patterns, which in some cases was the rule to determine when the system was properly setup. And the very expensive processors did not always make things better in every case. |
You make a good point about the industry changing; in fact, this equipment is evolving so quickly, what was relevant even five years ago isn't necessarily relevant today. In some cases, we have consumer gear that's literally superior to commercial gear from five years ago. Graphics hardware and scaling are perfect examples.
Don't forget - 4K isn't bleeding edge any more in terms of processing. Today, there computers, AV receivers, and BD players that can display 4K or upscale to it. Marvell's 1080p to UHD scaling is by all accounts excellent.
| mp20748 wrote: | | Now, what I was saying concerning the image on the screen, is also what happens inside a blend processor when dealing with these rates. And that is why it is hard to find a blend setup that would do that pattern structure or any or the conforming test patterns. And that is because of what happens when processing away from native rate of the source signal. The higher the rate, the more difficult it becomes, and the more you'll need to juggle the pixel structure. |
I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure how much relevance it has in this instance. One of the problems with judging anything consumer based on commercial equipment is that the commercial equipment is often quite dated in some respects. Bleeding-edge in some, but very dated in others. Blend boxes are a perfect example. By nature, they're very niche. Sony and Epson sell more consumer projectors in a day than every blend manufacturer together sells blend processors in a year. As a result, their development and time-on market is often years long, and the functionality is often VERY narrow.
The reason I'm pointing all this out, is that while an über-expensive commercial setup might have given you a lot of trouble scaling 1080p to 4k a few years ago, it's very possible that a good consumer piece like the VW1000 might not only be able to do it satisfactorily, it may be superior.
Here's the bottom line, though... I've actually seen a VW1000 in person with my own eyes - several times - and I can say without a doubt that it's a very good machine, whether displaying native 4k source material, or upscaled Blu-ray. In fact, I'd say its display of 1080p BD easily puts it in a very exclusive club of projectors that can display reference Blu-ray on a 12-foot-wid-plus screen. Combine my limited viewing experience, the comments by others who have seen it, their owners, and the positive reviews, and I'd say that trumps your experience with commercial gear from even a few years ago. Like I said, 1080p to UHD/4K isn't really bleeding-edge anymore. In fact, I'd be willing to bet money that the scaling - at least limited only to 1080p-to-4k conversion in the Sony VW1000 or even the Marvell scaling in the Oppo 103 - is likely better than anything you could buy from Barco or Sony 5 years ago - at any price.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here is a picture I took with my DSLR camera from 4 m away from the screen and downscaled in photoshop to get the best downscaled quality. This is closer to what I see on the screen, but not the same. I have also used a lightmeter to measure the different lines in the group and they measure about the same on my meter. This shows what I have said about the difference in cameras.
| Description: |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
IMG_550SD - Kopi.jpg |
| Filesize: |
330.07 KB |
| Downloaded: |
125 Time(s) |
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | I never claimed to be an expert, I only responded to things I know as fact, and what I myself have seen and expereinced. when you were in the industry dealing directly with the same displays at the time, the resolution was limited. nothing was really above 1280X1024.. |
Ditto. I'm doing the same thing. Obviously our frames of reference are different.
BTW, I haven't been totally out of it for that long. The last couple of setups I was directly involved in were 909's running 1600x1200 from an SGI Origin (with I think 32 processors and 3 or 4 graphics pipes) and another system with Christie 9500 Ultras. So, yeah - it's been well over 10 years since I was working on those systems. But, I stayed up on the hardware and design implementation and was intimately familiar with the design and deployment details on the ISU C6 - both when it was 909-based, and later when they moved to the Sony 4k projectors.
| mp20748 wrote: | | Since then, the industry has changed tremendously with the higher resolutions, especially anything up to 1920 horizontal lines. We've found out that the math can not always work in the actual application. and we also had bigger struggles dealing with blending and/in processors. meaning that it became very difficult to make a blend system conform to the test patterns, which in some cases was the rule to determine when the system was properly setup. And the very expensive processors did not always make things better in every case. |
You make a good point about the industry changing; in fact, this equipment is evolving so quickly, what was relevant even five years ago isn't necessarily relevant today. In some cases, we have consumer gear that's literally superior to commercial gear from five years ago. Graphics hardware and scaling are perfect examples.
Don't forget - 4K isn't bleeding edge any more in terms of processing. Today, there computers, AV receivers, and BD players that can display 4K or upscale to it. Marvell's 1080p to UHD scaling is by all accounts excellent.
| mp20748 wrote: | | Now, what I was saying concerning the image on the screen, is also what happens inside a blend processor when dealing with these rates. And that is why it is hard to find a blend setup that would do that pattern structure or any or the conforming test patterns. And that is because of what happens when processing away from native rate of the source signal. The higher the rate, the more difficult it becomes, and the more you'll need to juggle the pixel structure. |
I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure how much relevance it has in this instance. One of the problems with judging anything consumer based on commercial equipment is that the commercial equipment is often quite dated in some respects. Bleeding-edge in some, but very dated in others. Blend boxes are a perfect example. By nature, they're very niche. Sony and Epson sell more consumer projectors in a day than every blend manufacturer together sells blend processors in a year. As a result, their development and time-on market is often years long, and the functionality is often VERY narrow.
The reason I'm pointing all this out, is that while an über-expensive commercial setup might have given you a lot of trouble scaling 1080p to 4k a few years ago, it's very possible that a good consumer piece like the VW1000 might not only be able to do it satisfactorily, it may be superior.
Here's the bottom line, though... I've actually seen a VW1000 in person with my own eyes - several times - and I can say without a doubt that it's a very good machine, whether displaying native 4k source material, or upscaled Blu-ray. In fact, I'd say its display of 1080p BD easily puts it in a very exclusive club of projectors that can display reference Blu-ray on a 12-foot-wid-plus screen. Combine my limited viewing experience, the comments by others who have seen it, their owners, and the positive reviews, and I'd say that trumps your experience with commercial gear from even a few years ago. Like I said, 1080p to UHD/4K isn't really bleeding-edge anymore. In fact, I'd be willing to bet money that the scaling - at least limited only to 1080p-to-4k conversion in the Sony VW1000 or even the Marvell scaling in the Oppo 103 - is likely better than anything you could buy from Barco or Sony 5 years ago - at any price.
SC |
What you write here is very true, the upscaling the VW1000 does to UHD (3840x2160) is almost artifact free even with 1:1 pixel testpatterns, but when it upscales to real 4K (4096x2160) it struggles alot more and shows alot of artifacts in some 1:1 pixel testpatterns. The 1080p to UHD is a relatively easy upscaling, but to real 4K is much more difficult.
_________________
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: Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: |
What you write here is very true, the upscaling the VW1000 does to UHD (3840x2160) is almost artifact free even with 1:1 pixel testpatterns, but when it upscales to real 4K (4096x2160) it struggles alot more and shows alot of artifacts in some 1:1 pixel testpatterns. The 1080p to UHD is a relatively easy upscaling, but to real 4K is much more difficult. |
That was my point exactly.
However, there should be an adjustment that helps.
Last edited by mp20748 on Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:13 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
When i take one of my screenshots, and resize it, it looks like this...
The thing i like to see is still more or less the same result.. The light output on the resolution patterns.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
What you write here is very true, the upscaling the VW1000 does to UHD (3840x2160) is almost artifact free even with 1:1 pixel testpatterns, but when it upscales to real 4K (4096x2160) it struggles alot more and shows alot of artifacts in some 1:1 pixel testpatterns. The 1080p to UHD is a relatively easy upscaling, but to real 4K is much more difficult. |
That was my point exactly.
However, there should be an adjustment that helps. |
I am sure there is in the service menu of the VW1000, but I find it piontless to adjust it because it is soo good showing BD upscaled to 4K and I donīt bother.
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Can mp20748 and stridvognen please comment on the picture I took of the testpattern with my Canon camera to show a picture closer to what is shown on screen. And can someone post my picture so we donīt have to download it?
_________________
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: Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
What you write here is very true, the upscaling the VW1000 does to UHD (3840x2160) is almost artifact free even with 1:1 pixel testpatterns, but when it upscales to real 4K (4096x2160) it struggles alot more and shows alot of artifacts in some 1:1 pixel testpatterns. The 1080p to UHD is a relatively easy upscaling, but to real 4K is much more difficult. |
That was my point exactly.
However, there should be an adjustment that helps. |
I am sure there is in the service menu of the VW1000, but I find it piontless to adjust it because it is soo good showing BD upscaled to 4K and I donīt bother. |
That's a good way of accepting it. And to be honest with you, it looks damn good considering.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Im looking at your picture Andreas..
But it looks a bit wierd.. It looks like your camera addet lots of sharpness.. edge ringing and stuff.. same effect i seen on some of the other SONY pictures.
Is this whats on screen, or is that the camera or software your using.?
What i see is that its not holding the light level perfect at all resolutions, and it seems that the scaling roles off the level on the outer pixels on the edge of the lines, and not the same way on both vertical and horisontal.
Last edited by stridsvognen on Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:37 am; 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: Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
you should post your picture to Imageshack or one of the other image hosting operations first without any downsizing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | Im looking at your picture Andreas..
But it looks a bit wierd.. It looks like your camera addet lots of sharpness.. edge ringing and stuff.. same effect i seen on some of the other SONY pictures.
Is this whats on screen, or is that the camera or software your using.?
What i see is that its not holding the light level perfect at all resolutions, and it seems that the scaling roles off the level on the outer pixels on the edge of the lines, and not the same way on both vertical and horisontal. |
Like I have said earlier the Sony VW1000 upscaling and Reality Creation can add some edgeenhancement/ringing, and on this testpattern it is barly visible when you stand really close to the screen. And what you see as alot of added sharpness I am not sure, but it might be that you are so used to the CRT picture that I concider very soft?? And I also wrote that I measured the different lines both horizontally and vertically and they show about the same lightoutput on all the different lines in the group. I am not saying it is perfect, but it is showing the testpattern really good I think. Maby I will post a closeup later today of the center group if I have time before I go up to my cabin in the woods to relax for the weekend.
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
Last edited by Andreas21 on Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:04 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | you should post your picture to Imageshack or one of the other image hosting operations first without any downsizing. |
The downscaled image and the RAW look almost identical when I downsized in Photoshop so it wonīt make much difference.
_________________
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: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | Im looking at your picture Andreas..
But it looks a bit wierd.. It looks like your camera addet lots of sharpness.. edge ringing and stuff.. same effect i seen on some of the other SONY pictures.
Is this whats on screen, or is that the camera or software your using.?
What i see is that its not holding the light level perfect at all resolutions, and it seems that the scaling roles off the level on the outer pixels on the edge of the lines, and not the same way on both vertical and horisontal. |
Like I have said earlier the Sony VW1000 upscaling and Reality Creation can add some edgeenhancement/ringing, and on this testpattern it is barly visible when you stand really close to the screen. And what you see as alot of added sharpness I am not sure, but it might be that you are so used to the CRT picture that I concider very soft?? And I also wrote that I measured the different lines both horizontally and vertically and they show about the same lightoutput on all the different lines in the group. I am not saying it is perfect, but it is showing the testpattern really good I think. Maby I will post a closeup later today og the center group if I have time before I go up to my cabin in the woods to relax for the weekend. |
Have a good weekend!
|
|
| 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
|
|
