|
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 |
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Read what's in the thread ("Finished testing my second board being sent out"). meaning I put a VIM in my projector for testing before sending it out. So of course, why would I calibrate the projector to a VIM I'm testing?? And if you read further, you'll see where I've been almost posting in every thread that It's not yet finished setup and calibrated. |
Not just these shots but it's all your shots done in this thread over the last 3 years. It doesn't appear that you've ever done a greyscale calibration? Why calibrate? Because I assume the point is to provide enticing screenshots for prospective buyers. The colours are far enough out that even a basic calibration would help a lot. And that wouldn't change much as you keep testing/modifying. I've used all sorts of modified boards in my projector and the basic greyscale doesn't change drastically.
IMHO, a properly greyscale/colour calibrated STOCK projector is going to look miles better than one that isn't that has mods in it. The mods should be the icing on the cake. The foundation has to be there to support the icing.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Read what's in the thread ("Finished testing my second board being sent out"). meaning I put a VIM in my projector for testing before sending it out. So of course, why would I calibrate the projector to a VIM I'm testing?? And if you read further, you'll see where I've been almost posting in every thread that It's not yet finished setup and calibrated. |
Not just these shots but it's all your shots done in this thread over the last 3 years. It doesn't appear that you've ever done a greyscale calibration? Why calibrate? Because I assume the point is to provide enticing screenshots for prospective buyers. The colours are far enough out that even a basic calibration would help a lot. And that wouldn't change much as you keep testing/modifying. I've used all sorts of modified boards in my projector and the basic greyscale doesn't change drastically.
IMHO, a properly greyscale/colour calibrated STOCK projector is going to look miles better than one that isn't that has mods in it. The mods should be the icing on the cake. The foundation has to be there to support the icing.
Kal |
I know and agree. But saying all my shots for the past three years have been sub standard and DVD looking is not true. because there are a lot of shots in this thread over the years where the projector has been calibrated. And I even have some where I've even had others over to do a calibration. And have also been posting the same shots over on AVS. So I guess a lot of the praise for the shots have been off the mark. Or maybe the people who have been commenting are totally clueless as to what their looking for.
And just yesterday I got a good praise report on the shots from someone very well regarded here about how good the shots look and the improvement over the previous ones. And that's not the only person. And to get these praises even when the projector is not calibrated, to me is good..
Maybe they forgot or did not know it's not calibrated. Or they know what to look for in the shots...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | But saying all my shots for the past three years have been sub standard and DVD looking is not true. |
It's only my opinion of course. It can't be true or false however - it's an opinion.
I see shots like the ones here posted last week by Carmine on a 9500LC like yours and there's a night and day difference in colours and sharpness (to me). His shots look fantastic, like HD should (to me):
| karmat63 wrote: |
Testing a new modded FGM (radiance XS 1080p48, VDC/Marquee 9500 LC; raw from camera, just resized)
Venus at US Open (today mach) - Radiance XS 1080p50:
 |
Compare the above two pictures to the ones you've been posting over the last week, like this one:
| mp20748 wrote: |  |
By comparison yours looks soft, like DVD. It has bad ringing on the left side. The geometry is off. The contrast looks a bit blown out, colours faded/poor/off.
You may post whatever you like of course. I don't want to argue over this. I just find it odd since (to me) I find your shots to be sub-standard so I've never really understood why you post them. I'm sure in person it's very impressive but people buy based on what they see so why post something that looks a lot worse than what you see in person?
If these shots are in some way supposed to represent an upgrade, I wouldn't be interested myself and that's probably an incorrect assumpting to make. Again, I'm sure that they look much better in person. I always figured you're actually losing business by posting shots like this. Just my 2 cents.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll leave that one alone Kal..
However, I do find it interesting that you chose the softest shot of the bunch for comparison.
Now if you would have done a more accurate comparison, say where the backgrounds would be a point of measurement, because that's where you really get to see the bandwidth performance and ability to track the low end. Then I would take what you say as weight. But when you do compare shots, do make sure that EVERYTHING in the backgrounds is clear, especially on close ups and foreground shots. Those shots should reveal absolutely everything in the shot. Most of the shots that I take are showing how well the setup is resolving 1920X1080P 72hz in actuality. And it's doing it by showing everything being equal as it is and should be in the backgrounds as well - that's what is known as High Definition..
But comparing 1080P shots at 50hz to 1080P shots at 72hz....................well, if I had time I'll dial this baby down, but I'll rather leave it alone..
Sales, I'm not concerned with general sales right now. I'll get around to that next month. For now I'm still testing and posting shots, and focusing on the potential for commercial sales. Somehow someone saw the shots and shot me an email asking about doing the mods for commercial applications.
Don't know the person who's really interested in this, but one things for sure, they must see something in those shots.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | I'll leave that one alone Kal.. |
Why? Give me the truth. Spit it out.
| Quote: | | However, I do find it interesting that you chose the softest shot of the bunch for comparison. |
Ok, pick any of the other ones. Doesn't matter. They're all soft, have left edge ringing, poor colours, poor geometry, clipped whites, and crushed blacks.
| mp20748 wrote: | | Now if you would have done a more accurate comparison, say where the backgrounds would be a point of measurement, because that's where you really get to see the bandwidth performance and ability to track the low end. |
Huh? The low end on your shots is crushed for the most part. There's no low end to see in most of the shots.
Maybe I just don't understand. Show me one of the shots and tell me exactly what I'm looking for here. All I see for the most part is crushed blacks in your screenshots.
| Quote: | | Then I would take what you say as weight. But when you do compare shots, do make sure that EVERYTHING in the backgrounds is clear, especially on close ups and foreground shots. Those shots should reveal absolutely everything in the shot. Most of the shots that I take are showing how well the setup is resolving 1920X1080P 72hz in actually. |
But that's my point. I find your shots do the opposite. They're very soft don't show what 1920x1080 can do. But then how could they possibly show us what 1920x1080 can do? Your screenshots are 1280 pixels wide and only about 1000 pixels of that is actual image. That's about HALF the horizontal resolution of 1920x1080 HD. So how can your shots possible show how the setup is resolving 1920x1080? It's impossible. It doesn't make any sense at all. You've thrown away half the pixels. Your shots show how your projector can resolve around 1000x500. That's about it.
And how can they show us what 72Hz can do? That's motion. You can't see motion on a screenshot. At the very most, what you could do is show us a 60Hz and 72Hz shot to show us how your bandwidth improvements do not degrade the video signal. Ie: the image hasn't gotten softer. But I don't see how that's possible with 1000x500 screenshots that are really soft to begin with. Any benefit is (to me) completely lost in your shots.
| Quote: | | And it's doing it by showing everything being equal as it is and should be in the backgrounds as well - that's what is known as High Definition.. |
That doesn't make any sense/I don't understand.
| Quote: | | But comparing 1080P shots at 50hz to 1080P shots at 72hz....................well, if I had time I'll dial this baby down, but I'll rather leave it alone.. |
Again I don't understand the relevance. Refresh rate has nothing to do with resolution. Screenshots are static images. The point of this thread is screenshots not eliminition of 3:2 pulldown by going to 72Hz. We're taking static images in time. When you take these shots you're pausing the projector.
| Quote: | | Sales, I'm not concerned with general sales that right now. I'll get around to that next month. For now I'm still testing and posting shots, and focusing on the potential for commercial sales. Somehow somehow saw the shots and shot me an email asking about doing doing the mods for commercial applications. |
That's great. Good for you. I'm trying to understand what this person sees in the shots. I'm trying educate myself. Please help!
For the rest of us one thing that would really help me understand what's "good" about these screenshots is if you took one of them and explained why it's "good" to us. I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I'm just trying to understand where my gap in understanding exists.
My problem is that over the years I've gain a lot of experience with photography, projectors, and movie reproduction.
Three things that need to be well understood if someone expects to take good screenshots. I have spent a lot of time looking at images and pictures assessing quality. I've spent almost $10K in professional photo equipment over the years and use it regularly and understand in detail the relationships between ISO/fstop/shutter speed. I understand white clipping/black crush, gamma curves, primary colours, CIE/HD/SD colour spaces, etc. I understand why film or digital cameras don't have enough exposure range to properly capture screenshots that we see in person. I understand about HDR imaging to extend this contrast range (the best screenshots should be captured using HDR if the contrast range is too high). I understand the movie creation process, colour timing, grain issues, edge enhancement, 3:2 pulldown, and so on.
In a way I'm annoyed at what I notice and wish I didn't as when I see problems in movies it detracts from the experience sometimes. When I watch something I can usually tell what sort of camera equipment and lenses were used to shoot it. I sometimes find it very distracting (for example, I hated the look of Michael Mann's Public Enemies shot on video with a Sony CineAlta F23 setup - I stopped the movie half way through just to confirm and yup - I was right).
All that to say that I feel I really understand when something looks good, not good, or just different from what I'm used to.
So that's where I'm confused. I'm trying to understand what I'm missing when you say your shots are trying to show us something that was better than before. You often do a bunch of mods and then post screenshots saying "I just did XYZ mods, look at these screenshots". Problem is I never see what it is you're trying to show us. If I don't I can only imagine that 99.9% people won't see it either.
Please take one shot of yours and teach us. Please! Show us exactly what you're seeing in these shots that's better and be specific. It's to your benefit. I just don't see it myself.
| Quote: | | Don't know the person who's really interested in this, but one things for sure, they must see something in the shots. |
Why don't you start by telling us what YOU see in these shots.
Again, I'm sure they're 1000x better in person. But the whole point you're trying to make when you post your shots is that you're trying to show us some sort improvement based on the work you're doing. Up until now I don't see what you're trying to show us all with these shots.
EDIT: Actually anyone can help out too. Show me what it is that I'm missing here. I want to learn!
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | So that's where I'm confused. I'm trying to understand what I'm missing when you say your shots are trying to show us something that was better than before. You often do a bunch of mods and then post screenshots saying "I just did XYZ mods, look at this". Problem is I never see what it is you're trying to show us. If I don't I can only imagine that 99.9% people won't see it either.
Kal |
Now of course the screenshots are not going to reveal everything, and I'm not trying to convey that to everyone.
However, a lot of people do see what I've been saying. They really do, and they have been for years. And it is the very few that really understand what's going on through the shots that I've been getting both PM's and emails from. We're just not moving them for now.
Simply because you're not seeing it, is that reason enough cast doubt?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | kal wrote: | So that's where I'm confused. I'm trying to understand what I'm missing when you say your shots are trying to show us something that was better than before. You often do a bunch of mods and then post screenshots saying "I just did XYZ mods, look at this". Problem is I never see what it is you're trying to show us. If I don't I can only imagine that 99.9% people won't see it either.
Kal |
Now of course the screenshots are not going to reveal everything, and I'm not trying to convey that to everyone.
However, a lot of people do see what I've been saying. They really do, and they have been for years. And it is the very few that really understand what's going on through the shots that I've been getting both PM's and emails from. We're just not moving them for now.
Simply because you're not seeing it, is that reason enough cast doubt? |
I'm not casting doubt. I'm asking you to show us what we're supposed to be seeing as I don't see it myself. You say very few see it. Don't you want people to see it? Wouldn't that be a good thing?
If these people that send you PMs and emails understand what to look for, then by all means post what it is we're supposed to be seeing here. Consider this an open invite too for anyone to post here too. Don't send Mike a PM or email. Post here what you see and like about his screenshots so that we can all learn. It's also great advertising for Mike!
I wasn't sceptical before Mike but I'm starting to be now!
If even you can't explain what's better in these shots then I can only assume that you're not seeing the differences yourself in the screenshots! If you can't see them then how do you know that the people that do say they see something are telling the truth and it isn't simply some sort of placebo effect?
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: |
I wasn't sceptical before Mike but I'm starting to be now!
If even you can't explain what's better in these shots then I can only assume that you're not seeing the differences yourself in the screenshots! If you can't see them then how do you know that the people that do say they see something are telling the truth and it isn't simply some sort of placebo effect?
Kal |
I've had people to actually see this for themselves. And don't forget what Craig said (below), and he has not even seen the version I'm showing now. And it's a huge upgrade from what Craig saw and installed at his customers.
| CIR Engineering wrote: | Mike sent me one of these VIM's along with a set of VNB's a few weeks ago. I installed them in a client's Madrigal and did some extensive testing.
With the VIM only the resolution of the projector increased dramatically. His projector was really attenuating 1080p 60Hz badly before the VIM. After the VIM only, the projector was still attenuating, but its bandwidth was dramatically improved. The image was also much cleaner as well as being sharper.
I then installed the VNB's that Mike sent and I was even more impressed. The projector nearly perfectly resolved 1080p 60Hz and even 1080p 72Hz. I was using the SMTPE 1:1 to verify my findings and then switched to real world images for a subjective evaluation.
Both myself and my client are very happy with the improvements.
Another interesting byproduct of the mods is the ability for the Marquee to show details in dark images. The gamma response on the projector also seemed to be better than (in my opinion) a stock machine. Although, this may have been an illusion and due more to the better detail in dark areas of the picture.
I have gotten to see these boards at Mikes place as they have progressed over the past two years. Mike's made gradual steps to what is now a really nice set of mods.
You guys are in for a treat when you see the improvements.
craigr |
Link: http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/posting.php?mode=quote&p=268297
Last edited by mp20748 on Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:43 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nashou66 wrote: | How about this Kal?
Athanasios |
That's a really nice screenshot Athanasios.
Hard to expose properly for Gandalf's white shirt to show all the detail which you did very well. You probably lost a bit of black detail unless you shot HDR as it would have been impossible to expose for both light and dark areas (cameras just don't have enough contrast range or 'stops') using regular photography. You did not lose any of the while embroidery detail on his outfit from what I can tell which is probably more important given the scene. Good stuff!
White levels are good too (not clipped at all from what I can tell),
Detail/sharpness seems to be there (even though the resolution is only about half of 1080p) - the narrow depth of field putting King Théoden on the right out of focus helps also with making Gandalf on the left appear very sharp of course.
Not much colour information but tones seem very natural. Good colours.
The image has a nice 'pop' to it. Looks good.
Geometry and convergence seem pretty good too. Convergence is sometimes hard to judge as many camera lenses will cause chromatic aberration which is sometimes mistaken for misconvergence.
All in all a very nice looking screenshot. Good work!
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emdawgz1
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 7949
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kal. My guess is that it's the camera mike is using.
Having seen Williams setup in person. (which i think had an MP modded VIM) it was one of the best CRT's I've ever seen.
Sharp, detailed, vibrant.
I dont think his camera is capturing it was well as could be.
_________________
Follow my blog
www.thesinglebrother.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | I've had people to actually see this for themselves. And don't forget what Craig said (below), and he has not even seen the version I'm showing now. And it's a huge upgrade from what Craig saw and installed at his customers. |
As I've mentioned time and time again, I'm not questioning how it looks in person, I'm questioning your screenshots.
I'll say it again: To me your screenshots look horrible. No better than a low end CRT projector doing DVD for the most part. Your screenshots are really soft, have white clipping, black crush, poor geometry, colours are off, and so on.
Your screenshots most likely do not represent what someone is seeing in person which is a good thing, because (IMHO) if they did look like the real thing I don't think you'd sell anything (again IMHO)! I've never seen your mods in person so I can't comment on them.
There's nothing wrong with posting bad screenshots (people do it all time, myself included) but where I'm confused is that you often post that you've just improved your mods somehow and then post shots and like these and I just don't get it at all as (to me) the shots are bad. I don't see what I'm supposed to see in these screenshots you post. They often look like some low end CRT projectors displaying DVD.
To me, you posting these screenshots showing how good your mods are getting makes as much sense as someone doing audio speaker mods and letting customers listen to the results over the telephone. See what I'm getting at?
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emdawgz1 wrote: | Kal. My guess is that it's the camera mike is using.
Having seen Williams setup in person. (which i think had an MP modded VIM) it was one of the best CRT's I've ever seen.
Sharp, detailed, vibrant.
I dont think his camera is capturing it was well as could be. |
100% agreed.
My point is that Mike says there's something in these shots that I'm not getting, something that most people do not see. That there is indeed something in these shots and I'm missing. I'm just asking what it is that I'm missing.
I'm also trying to pursuade Mike that if his reason for posting these shots is to help sell mods then he should stop. I can't imagine someone buying his mods after seeing the shots. He's doing himself a disservice. IMHO.
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kal wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | I've had people to actually see this for themselves. And don't forget what Craig said (below), and he has not even seen the version I'm showing now. And it's a huge upgrade from what Craig saw and installed at his customers. |
As I've mentioned time and time again, I'm not questioning how it looks in person, I'm questioning your screenshots.
I'll say it again: To me your screenshots look horrible. No better than a low end CRT projector doing DVD for the most part. Your screenshots are really soft, have white clipping, black crush, poor geometry, colours are off, and so on.
Your screenshots most likely do not represent what someone is seeing in person which is a good thing, because (IMHO) if they did look like the real thing I don't think you'd sell anything (again IMHO)! I've never seen your mods in person so I can't comment on them.
There's nothing wrong with posting bad screenshots (people do it all time, myself included) but where I'm confused is that you often post that you've just improved your mods somehow and then post shots and like these and I just don't get it at all as (to me) the shots are bad. I don't see what I'm supposed to see in these screenshots you post. They often look like some low end CRT projectors displaying DVD.
To me, you posting these screenshots showing how good your mods are getting makes as much sense as someone doing audio speaker mods and letting customers listen to the results over the telephone. See what I'm getting at?
Kal |
Ok, I'll help you out a little here. A point and shoot camera CANNOT capture all that's on the screen, you'll need a higher quality 3 chip camera for that.
What a point and shoot can capture is the background and that the setup CAN reproduce it.
A point and shoot camera CANNOT also revel the sharpness of what's on the screen, especially at the higher scan rates. The camera will not capture the resolution capability of the image, because it's not capable of doing so. You would need a very high quality 3 chip camera for that as well.
But a point and shoot can show the ability of the system to reproduce sharpness at the higher bandwidth. And it does it simply by showing how well the image displays certain scenes and objects.
Now, since you're not disagreeing with what Craig had said, and not disputing the work of the mods, I'm not seeing a reason for your posting. Because I'm not claiming that a point and shoot camera can properly represent what I'm doing. I've only been saying that there are some things that can be revealed. And since I'm not that concerned myself about how the shots look (verified by me keep posting them without things being properly setup, calibrated and converged), I'm lust posting them showing how they look even in the state that the setup is in....that's going to change soon though..
When the times comes that I'll be making them available, it's then we'll be doing things a little different.
Now, what movie is that shot in that gave a good praise report on. I want to get the Blu ray and post some shots of it AFTER I finish the setup and calibration. It's very rare that I'd pull someone else shots for a comparison, but I feel a need to make an exception here.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skippyar
Joined: 22 May 2009
Posts: 108
Location: Bristol, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello gents, apologises for disrupting the flow of this thread, could I just ask what exactly causes those streaks seen on the left side of that example image:
The reason I ask is because I'm restoring a monitor for myself and have a theory "why" but haven't yet replaced the components I think are causing it.
[Quoting from Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ - "Horizontal timing problems would produce vertical bars on the right or left edge."] Which would tie in with the affected areas on the mainboard I'm servicing. I noticed looking "behind" that blank monitor image are faint slightly slanted horizontal "SCREEN" lines.
If asked to describe it I'd say it was 'voltage noise'. Many thanks and again apologises.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
18.14 KB |
| Viewed: |
6671 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
29.16 KB |
| Viewed: |
6671 Time(s) |
|
_________________
Barco 500 Data Owner.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karmat63
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 157
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's not just the camera, but the man behind too...
To post a decent screenshot you need a DSRL (or a very advanced compact camera) with a sharp lens, take the shoot in Raw on a steady tripod (possibly at lowest ISO), choosing the right exposure. Than you need an appropriate workout of the digital negative; first (and very important) you have to set color temperature to 6500, other way you will destroy your accurate greyscale setup on PJ. Next step is resizing the image, using conservative algorithms as found only in good softwares (of course photoshop, but it's not the only one). Then you have to save your image for the web, preserving it from disruptive artifacts (JPEG with high compression factor). Maybe best quality/size ratio could be find in PNG image...
IMO this is an appropriate workout to post a screenshot that would be representative of what you see on your screen. If posting a screenshot is something more then a game, I think it's mandatory... other way the variables would be totally out of control.
That's my 2 cents.
BTW, thanks Kal for your appreciation about my screenshot...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karmat63
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 157
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fuji F10 was the best p'n's at his times and stll is a very nice camera... But, as any p'n's it decides everything for you... and this is not a good thing...
But my point is another: if you want show the progresses of your work on a VPJ by screenshots, you should choose the right instuments and work on your skills.
For me and maybe for you is just a game, nothing else, so doesn't need any particular investment
Cioa, carmine
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| karmat63 wrote: | Fuji F10 was the best p'n's at his times and stll is a very nice camera... But, as any p'n's it decides everything for you... and this is not a good thing...
But my point is another: if you want show the progresses of your work on a VPJ by screenshots, you should choose the right instuments and work on your skills.
For me and maybe for you is just a game, nothing else, so doesn't need any particular investment
Cioa, carmine |
OK, let's make this thread what is is (shootout) and you prove what you're saying here. I don't see it that way, in that It's all about the camera and your skill level.
You two guys pick the shots for this weekend, and I'll stay with my point and shoot. I'll even dial my setup down to the same scan rate you're using. And we'll go form there...
Oh, I forgot. You do need a skill level. I'll put mine into the projector setup and leave everything else up to the P/S
You can also join in Kal..
It's really all about fun. let's have some fun..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
|
| 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
|
|
