The JVC, Sony and Epson Winter showdown

Soupdragon,

Let the camera pan more to the left. From memory another tall tower appears and it the buildings to the left of this.
 
Last weekend I went up to see Allan and had a demo of the Sony HW50 and the JVC X35 and I must admit I don't think the Sony is such a clear winner, after watching Avatar in 3D on the JVC then switching to the Sony we noticed the picture was brighter but also looked washed out, although it did appear sharper in 3D it wasn't sharper all of the time, the scene where all the floaty things land on Jake the JVC was much sharper and the floaty things were wighter on the Sony they were grey and blurry.

The Sony also seems to loose colour in 3D this was easily seen when you remove the 3D glasses then put them back on whilst watching-is it due to the lenses being yellow?, JVC on the other hand had much more vivid colours and better blacks there was also more depth in the 3D, you felt you could see further into the jungle also the black panther like animals were blacker and looked wet, slimey and more scary!

I would say the Sony looked more like a TV picture and the scene where they get out of the helicopter thing in the jungle there are two tall blue people and a normal army person in the foreground the normal army person looked like he was not really there, that he was added in to the film post filming - ok I know a lot of it is added in digitally and some of the blue people rant real ;) but the fact is you shouldn't be able to notice it, it was almost comical how he was just looking around and not part of the film.

I had pretty much made my mind up that the Sony was the one for me due to the reality creation and extra brightness yet when I demoed them both the JVC just wowed me with its colours and blacks, I did however notice some cross talk in despicable me on the JVC yet the overall picture was so vivid it was not a major problem and then when we saw Avatar there was no cross talk at all just an amazing picture.

At the end of the day it all comes down to personal preference so it always pays to go see them all for yourself
 
Ok here we go:

8242791150_165f290203_b.jpg
 
Your picture is incredible.

You can also clearly see the two buildings.

I had a play with my x3 tonight:

IMAG0368.jpg


This was with standard gamma.

IMAG0369.jpg


This with enhanced picture mode.

IMAG0370.jpg


This with standard mode but gamma A.

AS you see in the first image, gamma normal, standard mode, the left of the buildings is not there. This was the same as on the x55, and no amount of swapping gamma/iris/lamp/zooming out would bring it back.
 
Last edited:
Your picture is incredible.

You can also clearly see the two buildings.

I had a play with my x3 tonight:

I suspect it's gamma related. It would be interesting to have detailed measurement of the luminance curve from the different models to establish what's being applied at the appropriate setting.

Some products may use a custom curve versus flat power law etc and depending on the range and granularity of adjustments in the display chain it may be more or less difficult to achieve a certain goal. I was able to recreate results similar to the images posted above by applying different gamma curves. It's also worth bearing in mind that gamma can be used to exaggerate image elements (see image)that wouldn't usually be as visible applying the typical gamma levels employed during content creation. The effect can be similar to how different exposure settings suppress or accentuate elements of an image when taking photos.

Avi
 

Attachments

  • Example Gamma Correction.jpg
    Example Gamma Correction.jpg
    77.4 KB · Views: 140
Last edited:
chienmetallique said:
Seems to me you won't be changing?

There's a bit of skull duggery going on with my photo, more on that later :devil:
 
Shame I don't have this disc (not a Batman fan myself) as I'd love the challenge of trying to see if I could get the second building to 'appear' using my Lumagen (or if it is already present with my current calibration).

There is also the issue that on a darker scene the Sony's iris will close down, but also it will ramp up the gamma and contrast on some parts of the image to attempt to keep the highlights at the same level as 'pre iris'. This could make certain details more visible, so it could be that even with a 'perfect' calibration on the JVC that the second building isn't as visible. I am more baffled that it wasn't visible at all though as swopping the gamma settings is possibly a little coarse, you would have thought that one setting would bring it in. I also wonder if the Eshift was on for this test as there is the contrast setting in the MPC menu, wondering if this does anything to effect it as well.

Probably all questions I could answer for myself if I had an X55 for a day or so, but as of now I'm not convinced that it gives enough of an improvement over what I have now to justify the extra cost over the X35. Might be tempted just to go for the X35 option purely to get a white case (and the OH happy ;)) and of course a new lamp. Take £600-700 off for the old HD350 in the classifieds and it's a pretty minor purchase compared to over £4k for the X55 minus the HD350 resale.

I really enjoyed going over to Jagdeepp's place, but the short time I had has left me with more questions than answers right now. Probably better not to rush to any orders just yet for me anyway...

PS: Jagdeepp, your PM inbox is full. ;)
 
Last edited:
There's a bit of skull duggery going on with my photo, more on that later :devil:

This particular comment of the visible/invisible building got me curious as to whether my projector could reveal it. I wanted to create a photo so that Mooro could point to me where it is - but the photo wouldn't be much use if the building was invisible in my photo too.

Sooooo......

1st up, I got Dr Darbee and cranked him up to 120% HD as he's pretty good at bringing highlights to the deep shadows (I normally have him around 50% on this projector)

I've got 10 default gamma settings on the VW85 so I messed with them all to reveal as much shadow detail as possible. I was pleased to find that my gamma was spot on and I already had the best setting for this particular scene.

There was also the danger of under-exposing the photgraph which would result in crushed blacks and therefore defeat the objective of revealing the building. I therefore took several photos at various exposures and looked at the details revealed in the brightest image and worked my way back towards the darkest images. The images with crushed blacks I dumped and I picked the image with the darkest look, but that still retained all the detail. This is the image I posted. It will look a bit different on everyone's screen but on my iMac, it was a bit brighter than the projected image.
This means my actual projected image is a bit blacker than this (the over exposure raises blacks) and it also means there is some detail in the photograph that I would struggle to resolve with my naked eye when looking at this scene on my projector, as it would be too dark.

So there we have it.

My objective was to show the scene in question and have mooro point out where the building is. As it stands, mooro made his own pics which shows it anyway so it was a complete waste of time:facepalm:

Ah well, I had nothing better to do anyway - my pre-order of the Dark Knight Rises still hasn't arrived yet :(
 
True Kelvin re iris but remember we had this disabled throughout the whole test.
 
I suspect it's gamma related. It would be interesting to have detailed measurement of the luminance curve from the different models to establish what's being applied at the appropriate setting.

Some products may use a custom curve versus flat power law etc and depending on the range and granularity of adjustments in the display chain it may be more or less difficult to achieve a certain goal. I was able to recreate results similar to the images posted above by applying different gamma curves. It's also worth bearing in mind that gamma can be used to exaggerate image elements (see image)that wouldn't usually be as visible applying the typical gamma levels employed during content creation. The effect can be similar to how different exposure settings suppress or accentuate elements of an image when taking photos.

Avi

Your spot on!
 
True Kelvin re iris but remember we had this disabled throughout the whole test.

I'd missed that bit, which further surprises me that the black levels were as good on the Sony as the JVC as native on/off is only around 6-7000:1 on the Sony verses maybe 30-35,000:1 at full zoom/half iris on the X55. I'm quite puzzled by it all...maybe I should go and buy a Panasonic (NOT!). :D
 
Shame I don't have this disc (not a Batman fan myself) as I'd love the challenge of trying to see if I could get the second building to 'appear' using my Lumagen (or if it is already present with my current calibration).

There is also the issue that on a darker scene the Sony's iris will close down, but also it will ramp up the gamma and contrast on some parts of the image to attempt to keep the highlights at the same level as 'pre iris'. This could make certain details more visible, so it could be that even with a 'perfect' calibration on the JVC that the second building isn't as visible. I am more baffled that it wasn't visible at all though as swopping the gamma settings is possibly a little coarse, you would have thought that one setting would bring it in. I also wonder if the Eshift was on for this test as there is the contrast setting in the MPC menu, wondering if this does anything to effect it as well.

Probably all questions I could answer for myself if I had an X55 for a day or so, but as of now I'm not convinced that it gives enough of an improvement over what I have now to justify the extra cost over the X35. Might be tempted just to go for the X35 option purely to get a white case (and the OH happy ;)) and of course a new lamp. Take £600-700 off for the old HD350 in the classifieds and it's a pretty minor purchase compared to over £4k for the X55 minus the HD350 resale.

I really enjoyed going over to Jagdeepp's place, but the short time I had has left me with more questions than answers right now. Probably better not to rush to any orders just yet for me anyway...

PS: Jagdeepp, your PM inbox is full. ;)


I didn't have a whole lot of time to do this but I too was curious after seeing the X3 photos vs. Soup's 85 pics so I went downstairs and took a couple quick snaps of my JVC RS55 (21pt cal only on Lumagen mini as I haven't got around to doing the 3D LUT yet). I run more about 2.15 gamma on avg using STD CP @D65. Keep in mind this is freehand and w/ the PJ only on about 10min. (and the Darblet OFF). But something has to be crushing blacks on that X3 IMO because I can clearly delineate the buildings on the left and the pics look poor compared to what I see in the theater...

P1030650.jpg



P1030651.jpg



P1030655.jpg


:)
 
Last edited:
I didn't have a whole lot of time to do this but I too was curious after seeing the X3 photos vs. Soup's 85 pics so I went downstairs and took a couple quick snaps of my JVC RS55 (21pt cal only on Lumagen mini as I haven't got around to doing the 3D LUT yet). I run more about 2.15 gamma on avg using STD CP @D65. Keep in mind this is freehand and w/ the PJ only on about 10min. (and the Darblet OFF). But something has to be crushing blacks on that X3 IMO because I can clearly delineate the buildings on the left and the pics look poor compared to what I see in the theater...


P1030650.jpg


:)

The RS55/X70 is a fair step ahead of the X3 with its improved constrast and e-shift. It will actually be very interested to see Zombie's shootout on AVS with the X70 up against the newer X55, with the better contrast X70 versus the new and improved e-shift on the X55. It may actually be cheaper to get a close out deal on an X70 than the new X55 so it will be a very interesting discussion.

As for your 10 minute warm up time, maybe you should let it run a little longer and switch on the Darbee - your missing some boats on the river :devil:

8241599021_8e24bbccd4_b.jpg
 
DKX90Shadowdetail.jpg


My eyes can pick this detail out on screen photographing was tricky but this is the best i could do.
Had to overexpose with high iso to show the detail available seen in real life with gamma correctly set (15 squares highlighted as explained in x30-x70-x90 thread)
 
image


My eyes can pick this detail out on screen photographing was tricky but this is the best i could do.
Had to overexpose with high iso to show the detail available seen in real life with gamma correctly set (15 squares highlighted as explained in x30-x70-x90 thread)

Wow!

The shadow detail in this scene is simply incredible. It just goes to show how much detail is in the blu-ray disk. A lot of us won't be able to actually see some of this detail in the scene due to the limitations of our projector/room/eyesight. I admitted that with my image, some of it I couldn't see with the naked eye and only over exposure brought it out in the photograph. If you can actually see all this finer detail on your screen I think your either (a) an owl (b) a bit economic with the truth or (c) in possession of a very nice projector ;)
 
Thinking out loud....

This thread has had over 3000 views already - I wonder how many people have went to the 37:12 time stamp in TDK to see how it looks on their set-up!
 
Thinking out loud....

This thread has had over 3000 views already - I wonder how many people have went to the 37:12 time stamp in TDK to see how it looks on their set-up!

I've been trying to find my dark knight blu-ray, without success, damn boxes still full of junk from moving!
 
Thinking out loud....

This thread has had over 3000 views already - I wonder how many people have went to the 37:12 time stamp in TDK to see how it looks on their set-up!

do you know how long it took me to realize this screenshot was from TDK and not the TDKR? My RS55 is perfect in this scene, it looks just like Kevins.

I'm calibrating a 2nd HW50 today, the buzzing in 3D is much less on this model than the first I saw a few weeks ago. You can still hear it, but it's more quiet than it was before.

The JVC's should be landing very soon in the US, so we'll continue the showdown as well. I'm still waiting on the Mitsubishi HC8000 glasses.
 
do you know how long it took me to realize this screenshot was from TDK and not the TDKR? My RS55 is perfect in this scene, it looks just like Kevins.

I'm calibrating a 2nd HW50 today, the buzzing in 3D is much less on this model than the first I saw a few weeks ago. You can still hear it, but it's more quiet than it was before.

The JVC's should be landing very soon in the US, so we'll continue the showdown as well. I'm still waiting on the Mitsubishi HC8000 glasses.

Yes, its a very good scene with amazing depth in the shadow detail. Glad your RS55 looks like Kevins and not Hawk-eye's with the red blacks ;)
In my room I can only see about 80% of what is shown in the pics with my naked eye, the rest isn't visible unfortunately. You really don't know what your missing until you see little experiments like this, quite an eye opener. I've 1200 hrs on the lamp so a bulb change will likely help here.

Looking forward to seeing the JVC's land with you and also the AVF reviewers have got the X55 and X75 on their doorsteps so loads more info to come in the coming week or 2 :thumbsup:
 
Soupdragon
I think that the 37 minute still from TDK will be going down in AVF folk lore as a must use test image for assessing black level and shadow detail picture performance for PJs. Yep had a look too!
 
Steve Stifler said:
Soupdragon
I think that the 37 minute still from TDK will be going down in AVF folk lore as a must use test image for assessing black level and shadow detail picture performance for PJs. Yep had a look too!

Indeed, it's a reference scene all right, thanks to Jagadeep, Mooro and Ricky J for finding that gem.
Kudos also goes to the producers and the detailed blu ray master- it's clear why many regard this as a reference disk for picture quality. Too often you watch movies and the blacks are crushed no matter how good your set up is.
 
Had another play with my x3. Used the avs calibration disc to set black/white. Read on a forum that a custom gamma of 2.2/2.3 was pretty accurate o.o.t.b.

This is what happened:

IMAG0375.jpg


IMAG0377.jpg


Wow! What an improvement. This taken with a mobile phone too.

Jagdeep and I have been having a chuckle this evening about how 37:12 has gone viral. Funny old world.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom