24p smooth film yes or no?

[ellisdj]

The last point I stumbled across (and then I promise I'll shut up!) is that. 2.4 cal can be problematic for people whose eyes have above average sensitivity to light, especially if their TV has a high peak luminance. The human eye's level of dilation is driven by the brightest part of the image they're looking at, so if a TV is outputting high luminescence in part of the image the viewers eyes will respond to that, and if the persons eyes are sensitive they'll contract to a point where shadow detail is lost on a 2.4 cal.

Completely subjective point, as how the hell do any of us know how sensitive our eyes are? But worth throwing in for good measure.

I didnt know that - I have light sensitive eyes - however the first thing I do is calibrate max luminance to a set level - thats what contrast does -- I set that to approx 30ftl - I know that is a good light level for my eyes, I think that is 58 contrast on my set.

I have seen cal results where they run a higher contrast - that does potentially give the image more zing but I find it too bright....

I would like to see another set cal'd by a pro to see how it is - who is offering?

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Playing I find set to THX mode the gamma setting has no effect. I guess thats normal and wonder what gamma the THX mode sets.

 

[mr malarky]

Playing I find set to THX mode the gamma setting has no effect. I guess thats normal and wonder what gamma the THX mode sets.

Most likely 2.2, as that's the THX recommended setting according to this:

http://www.displaycalibrationonline.com/reviews_panny2010.asp

 

[mr malarky]

The last point I stumbled across (and then I promise I'll shut up!) is that. 2.4 cal can be problematic for people whose eyes have above average sensitivity to light, especially if their TV has a high peak luminance. The human eye's level of dilation is driven by the brightest part of the image they're looking at, so if a TV is outputting high luminescence in part of the image the viewers eyes will respond to that, and if the persons eyes are sensitive they'll contract to a point where shadow detail is lost on a 2.4 cal.

Completely subjective point, as how the hell do any of us know how sensitive our eyes are? But worth throwing in for good measure.

I didnt know that - I have light sensitive eyes - however the first thing I do is calibrate max luminance to a set level - thats what contrast does -- I set that to approx 30ftl - I know that is a good light level for my eyes, I think that is 58 contrast on my set.

I have seen cal results where they run a higher contrast - that does potentially give the image more zing but I find it too bright....

I would like to see another set cal'd by a pro to see how it is - who is offering?

Dont mind you having a look at the ZT, if you don't mind a bit of a drive (we're down on the Surrey/West Sussex border).

 

[ellisdj]

Hi Malarky

That is a kind and the perfect offer thank you - that is the set I would want to see cal'd up and you have a source I would want to see playing on it as well - bouble bonus

Sometime in the near future it will be great to set this up

 

[mr malarky]

No worries, happy for the mods to forward you my email address so we can sort out a date etc.

 

[theflyingwasp]

I'm not going to embarrass myself talking about gamma because I know very little about it ,I've taken a few people's advice and got in touch with Steven withers about calibration ,hopefully it will be done oct/nov ,just typed his calibration settings in from the av forum ,picture looks very good apart from colour temperature at warm people just look a wee bit sunburned ,changed it to normal.skin tones still look a bit off but outdoor scenes look amazing hmmm.

i still feel I have a very slight picture shake ,maybe it's a setting on my oppo feeding the ZT or I'm nuts.anyone know what setting on my oppo might cause this

and the intelligent frame creation is off like Ellisdj said the director didn't intend for this feature to be on so I'm watching the movie the way the director intended.

 

[mr malarky]

I'm not going to embarrass myself talking about gamma because I know very little about it ,I've taken a few people's advice and got in touch with Steven withers about calibration ,hopefully it will be done oct/nov ,just typed his calibration settings in from the av forum ,picture looks very good apart from colour temperature at warm people just look a wee bit sunburned ,changed it to normal.skin tones still look a bit off but outdoor scenes look amazing hmmm.

i still feel I have a very slight picture shake ,maybe it's a setting on my oppo feeding the ZT or I'm nuts.anyone know what setting on my oppo might cause this

and the intelligent frame creation is off like Ellisdj said the director didn't intend for this feature to be on so I'm watching the movie the way the director intended.

In terms of the settings on your oppo, basically all picture processing options should be set to "off" so it's acting purely as a transport and sending a clean video signal to your TV. Someone ese on this theead will be better placed to talk about the settings options in detail in the oppo. If your not sure about some of the setting options though then dojt worry, whoever calibrates your ZT will check your video signal path as well, which will include going into the settings menu on your oppo and making sure its all as it should be.

I know what you mean about skin tones looking a bit sunburned initially, think this is basically because we're so accustomed to TV's being skewed towards blue in their 'out the box' settings. Skyfall is a great reference disc for picture quality, and with colour temperature set to 'warm' the skin tones look bang-on with that disc, maybe give it some time or just wait till its calibrated (as every panel will be slightly different in terms of its out the box colours).

 

[ellisdj]

.

i still feel I have a very slight picture shake ,maybe it's a setting on my oppo feeding the ZT or I'm nuts.anyone know what setting on my oppo might cause this

What do you mean by picture shake?

 

[theflyingwasp]

Ignore the picture shake thing Ellisdj it's just me being paranoid ,just been mucking about with the IFC so much I thought the actual image on screen was shaking or juddering even tho the Ifc was off.

Yes I am starting to think I'm so used to seeing a bad picture that when I get it properly calibrated it may look weird at first.will be glad when its all sorted i won't have to muck about with controls anymore ,if someone had told me a few years ago I'd be paying 200-300 quid for someone to fix the picture on my tv I would have probably cried with laughter.

long gone are the days when I had my 21inch hitachi with a bit of black sticky tape along the bottom of the screen to hide the bottom of the image since the tracking on the VHS i was watching was a little bit off.

 

[ellisdj]

You wont think it looks weird you will think it looks right for the first time - evething just clicks into place and it doesnt matter what your watching your just seeing whats there as its supposed to be. Its very easy to tell I think - you will have no regrets

 

[Son_of_SJ]

Just as long as nobody asks me any deep questions about what all these figures mean .....!

Hmm, be careful what you wish for - you might get it. When I said that, 21 posts ago, on page 3 number 10 of this thread, I didn't really expect the consequence to be that absolutely nobody would have anything to say about my lovingly compiled pre- and post-calibration gamma values for all my modern televisions ...... hey ho. :?

 

[theflyingwasp]

A lot of it goes over my head ,a lot of u guys have been into this stuff for years ,going from the gt50 to zt60 I don't really have much to compare things to.some people have real problems out there and I'm fretting over sharpness and contrast lol

 

[ellisdj]

Just as long as nobody asks me any deep questions about what all these figures mean .....!

Hmm, be careful what you wish for - you might get it. When I said that, 21 posts ago, on page 3 number 10 of this thread, I didn't really expect the consequence to be that absolutely nobody would have anything to say about my lovingly compiled pre- and post-calibration gamma values for all my modern televisions ...... hey ho. :?

Son of SJ - that table doesnt really say a lot mate.

I know for a fact its possible to get a good 2.19 / 2.2 gamma average out of the LX5090, colour temperature means nothing really - you are aiming for 6500k but its never 100% bang on.

Its interesting that your LG set is calibrated to 2.4 and the others to 2.2? Do you knwo why - thats not an indepth question but at leats I am showing interest

 

[mr malarky]

Just as long as nobody asks me any deep questions about what all these figures mean .....!

Hmm, be careful what you wish for - you might get it. When I said that, 21 posts ago, on page 3 number 10 of this thread, I didn't really expect the consequence to be that absolutely nobody would have anything to say about my lovingly compiled pre- and post-calibration gamma values for all my modern televisions ...... hey ho. :?

Just posted on that thread, now I've had chance to re-read them - they make much more sense now, having seen the process first hand!

 

[Son_of_SJ]

I know for a fact its possible to get a good 2.19 / 2.2 gamma average out of the LX5090, colour temperature means nothing really - you are aiming for 6500k but its never 100% bang on.

Its interesting that your LG set is calibrated to 2.4 and the others to 2.2? Do you knwo why - thats not an indepth question but at leats I am showing interest

Hello Interested ellisdj (who needs Steve Davis, the Interesting snooker player, anyway!) surely the post-calibration temperatures are worth checking, no? Steve got them all as close to 6500K as he could.

No, I don't know why the LG is calibrated to a gamma of 2.4 whereas the other televisions are closer to 2.2 - I was more than happy to leave Steve to do what he thought was best!

 

[ellisdj]

Do you know why and what that is a measure of?

6500k is white and its a measure of how accurate your white is .... Pretty sure that's correct

 

[strapped for cash]

When I said that, 21 posts ago, on page 3 number 10 of this thread, I didn't really expect the consequence to be that absolutely nobody would have anything to say about my lovingly compiled pre- and post-calibration gamma values for all my modern televisions ...... hey ho. :?

You're assuming that effort is directly proportionate to reward. Unfortunately, life doesn't work that way.

It probably doesn't help, but I read and ruminated on your post, Son_of_SJ, even though I didn't respond directly.

 

[Gawaind]

I know this is an old thread, but if anyone is still interested, I just got a ZT65b, and when setting it up using Avatar 3D, I prefer the 24p smooth set to medium or high, . I tried turning it off and it was very juddery, also I have the 3D refresh rate set to auto as the 120HZ mode strangely seems to introduce more flicker. If I turn on the intelligent frame creation to mid and turn 24p smooth film to off, the picture doesn't really have that much noticeable judder, but I just set the 24p smooth film to mid or high and have intelligent frame creation set to mid, this seems to really smooth out the picture and make it crisper. I can't understand why everyone advises to turn these features off, the judder is very noticeable with all these features turned off. The panasonic zt65b is by no means perfect in every area. So I believe taking advantage of processing can make the picture better. By the way I applied the calibrated 3D settings from the sound and vision website, the sound and vision recommended calibration settings have much better blacks than the built in cinema THX 3D, the blacks are darker and the colours pop more although I'm not sure if the darker blacks are obscuring some shadow detail, but it looks great . But I'm not an expert and can't afford a calibrator to come around and set it up so it's the best I can do .

 

[Glacialpath]

Personally I would never use anything like IFC or 24p Smooth.

The main reason being most BDs these days are created at 23.98fps so you're not getting the full 24 frames anyway.

This (stupid idea in my mind) was to compremise between the different frame rates between PAL and NTSC. The PAL 1080 will be 1080/50i 1080/25p = 50 frames interlaced and 25 progressive.

the NTSC 1080 picture is 1080/60i or 1080/30p = 60 Interlaced and 30 progressive.

Don't ask my why they can't make a standardised 1920 x 1080 resolution picture 24fps world wide if the feature has be shot primeraly in 24fps but I think it's mostly to do with TV content. with NTSC SD at 480i and PAL at 576i thse creat a different frame rate and with PAL having more picture available in the first place means less frames to put it on screen.

You'd have to look up on Wikipedia for a more indepth explination but that is basically why you get judder no matter what you do. There are some BDs out there that are 24p and they will look best with any fancy TV setting set to off so you watch it native but I couldn't tell you which ones. Don't even trust the packaging. I would say some of the early BDs are 24p

 

[ellisdj]

I know this is an old thread, but if anyone is still interested, I just got a ZT65b, and when setting it up using Avatar 3D, I prefer the 24p smooth set to medium or high, . I tried turning it off and it was very juddery, also I have the 3D refresh rate set to auto as the 120HZ mode strangely seems to introduce more flicker. If I turn on the intelligent frame creation to mid and turn 24p smooth film to off, the picture doesn't really have that much noticeable judder, but I just set the 24p smooth film to mid or high and have intelligent frame creation set to mid, this seems to really smooth out the picture and make it crisper. I can't understand why everyone advises to turn these features off, the judder is very noticeable with all these features turned off. The panasonic zt65b is by no means perfect in every area. So I believe taking advantage of processing can make the picture better. By the way I applied the calibrated 3D settings from the sound and vision website, the sound and vision recommended calibration settings have much better blacks than the built in cinema THX 3D, the blacks are darker and the colours pop more although I'm not sure if the darker blacks are obscuring some shadow detail, but it looks great . But I'm not an expert and can't afford a calibrator to come around and set it up so it's the best I can do .

Your problem here is in the refresh rate you have set - Leave it on Auto and you wont get juddering in any 3D film.

I am sure avatar is 100hz not 120hz hence the juddering.

If you get the TV calibrated when you can you will see that 24fps smooth adds artifacts and false edges etc - its not needed

I get almost perfet picture and movement in 3D that is equal to that of 2D for the most part (tech of the panel aside)

Calibrated 3D on your TV will blow your mind!!