Arguments for and against calibration

[lxd55]

Thanks Ellis for the feedback, I'll take a look at the links you posted, might even be able to understand gamma 2.2 and 2.4!!

i may take you up on your meter if I can get my head around it . How old is it btw, does age affect it's capabilities, or is it ok for someone to use to "dip their toe in" and then upgrade etc...

best

lxd

 

[mr malarky]

I would have thought you should have your AV Receiver to to upscale to 1080p for your Sky HD Source for a starters.

After a lot of playing around with the various settings on my system after calibration I eventually found the best option was to just turn off all the video processing in the receiver, set the sky box resolution to 'auto', and let the TV do all the upscaling work.

 

[ellisdj]

Its about 9 months old - and age does affect all meters. as does usage and storage - they drift

I have only used it a handful of times - more importantly its been stored in a dry/ dark environment - lots and lots of silica gel packs keeping moisture away. I would say it would be good for about an another 6 odd months if stored the same -I was told its good for 2 years by Calman when I bought it.

You do need to read that guide really, its a lot of reading a lots to take in - its one of those when you actually do it it all makes more sense than just reading it alone.

 

[ellisdj]

I would have thought you should have your AV Receiver to to upscale to 1080p for your Sky HD Source for a starters.

After a lot of playing around with the various settings on my system after calibration I eventually found the best option was to just turn off all the video processing in the receiver, set the sky box resolution to 'auto', and let the TV do all the upscaling work.

Malarky the TV Will not upscale it will just display the 1080i image. The amp will upscale it progressive so you will get 1080p. I would try that again

 

[bigboss]

A 1080p TV will take a 1080i signal, deinterlace it, and display it at the native resolution of 1080p. There is no upscaling involved, as the 1080i signal has the same horizontal and vertical resolution as the 1080p signal, but only sends alternating scanlines on each frame, so the TV comes up with a guess for odd scanlines in one frame and even scanlines in the next.

 

[ellisdj]

Thats a good copy and paste - but I didnt know that the tv would do that.

If that is the case its probably best doing what your doing - you would expect the scaler in the display to be better than in your amp.

 

[mr malarky]

Thats a good copy and paste - but I didnt know that the tv would do that.

If that is the case its probably best doing what your doing - you would expect the scaler in the display to be better than in your amp.

i'll cheerfully defer to BB on the technical terminology as to why it's better to let the TV do the work, but having tried lots of different settings over a few weeks that was the conclusion I came to. The Receiver was previously set up to upscale all video to 1080p and set to 'PDP' output. Pioneer receivers let you set the type of display that's connected, apparently so it can 'optimise' the video signal for that type of display, which seemed to work fine when I had the 5090 kuro connected (not sure if that's because it works particularly well with pioneer displays). However, with the ZT I found there was some 'blocking' in very dark scenes and some smearing on flesh tones, that disappeared when I switched off all the video processing in the receiver.

As you say Ellis, with hindsight it shouldn't be a surprise I guess; do you let a £1,500 AV receiver that's spec'd primarily for audio performance do the video processing, or let a £3,500 TV do the work?

 

[ellisdj]

Its not always a case of what cost more when it comes to things like that - that was my initial thinking on it. I was thinking best to have a 1080p signal than only get 1080i - obviously thats not happening by all accounts - I didnt know that at the time

 

[ellisdj]

There are no doubts in my mind now that calibrating this way I have now has given me significantly better picture than what I had last time.

This is from memory of course

I have taken a couple of snaps to try and show how this calibration has escalated my picture quality - as always its very difficult to do proper justice

http://imageshack.com/a/img21/1825/ynz7.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img9/2881/fhdm.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img534/5035/zo10.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img23/425/om8o.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img59/9681/ij8c.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img542/7570/4vc5.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img51/8963/jca8.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img12/7062/7ssm.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img546/9000/atzt.jpg

 

[Son_of_SJ]

Hello ellisdj, yesterday on the "KRP 500A replacement?" thread you said that:

i thought you would need to be side by side to see the difference but you don't. What SW Is getting at is that the 65 is bigger with still stunning PQ - but the ZT Is better, is clearer and cleaner by my memory. I will calibrate the ZT soon, I have just done my 65VT using a new method for me. I have got considerably better PQ than I had last time. I am looking forward to seeing what the ZT can do.

Which here you have just reinforced with:

There are no doubts in my mind now that calibrating this way I have now has given me significantly better picture than what I had last time.

This is from memory of course

It's good that your new method of calibration with your new 65VT65 has given you better results than you got with your previous method on your previous 65VT65. So, the question which has doubtless occurred to you also, is - how would your father's 60ZT65, if you calibrated it with your new method, compare with your second 65VT65 also calibrated with your new method? I ask because you had previously said that the ZT was clearly better than the VT.

 

[ellisdj]

I will know on Wednesday when I go over there to do it. I am extremely keen to see it now and see how the VT compares, I have got the VT looking real buff - I wonder if I can squeeze a bit more out of it yet. My judgements so far have been based ona real small amount of time with the ZT but that was enough for me to notice a few differences - I have got a good eye for it I feel.

I honestly feel the ZT will still be a fair bit better - for starters its smaller so that will make a difference. Its got a better filter/ holds onto its blacks better with various content on screen but more importantly I think will be the fact there is no gap between the image and the glass.

Its quite interesting when you place the new meter I have on the screen you can clearly see the gap between the image and the glass - it looks like the meter isnt touching the screen when it is - obviously this is a side on view - not how you view normally but still very interesting. I had not ever noticed / seen this before.

Obviously the 65VT has the size - the sheer scale of full screen images when you sit where I do is incredible in the dark and tbh the 60ZT doesnt even look big to me when I look at it - but it is big. In terms of what to buy its a tough one - I dont regret buying the 65VT for 1 second and I think I could sit quite a few Kuro owners down and it would blow their socks off. It really lets you in to whatever you are watching - not before a calibration though only after !!

 

[Deleted member 2457]

There are no doubts in my mind now that calibrating this way I have now has given me significantly better picture than what I had last time.

This is from memory of course

I have taken a couple of snaps to try and show how this calibration has escalated my picture quality - as always its very difficult to do proper justice

http://imageshack.com/a/img21/1825/ynz7.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img9/2881/fhdm.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img534/5035/zo10.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img23/425/om8o.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img59/9681/ij8c.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img542/7570/4vc5.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img51/8963/jca8.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img12/7062/7ssm.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img546/9000/atzt.jpg

Nice images again, the clarity and depth is great. :clap:

Any chance of some animation pictures? It would be interesting to see how calibration affects other images, perhaps football, tennis or golf too.

:cheers:

 

[ellisdj]

Thats a tougher one for me as I dont have Sky Sports, the picture on BT sports isnt great, but I will see what they have on today - I will see what I can do for you Gel - when are you having yours calibrated?

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Thats a tougher one for me as I dont have Sky Sports, the picture on BT sports isnt great, but I will see what they have on today - I will see what I can do for you Gel - when are you having yours calibrated?

I am still thinking about it. At the moment my fans are making more noise than what they were, so I am deciding what to do about that, then I will make a decision. I do like your images though.

 

[ellisdj]

The picture quality has gone sick since this calibration - that scene at the end of Dark Knight Rises looks insane - the levels of detail I am getting now is crazy but its the depth and 3 Dimensionality of the image that really sets it off. The shading of scenes and what that does to the image. Movement is hugely improved - there is minimal to no smearing now - where before I would get a bit.

Avatar looks great on all systems / TV's its one of those films - but to be honest the bit at the beginning with the space ship that soars past you - that just looks absolutely crazy!

It was a stroke of luck me stumbling upon the thread that had the information to use these patterns to calibrate. I am very glad I did

 

[ellisdj]

Some pics fopr Gel - TV broadcast quality on Virgin is not great - Its very hard to get a decent footbal game shot - not like on Sky.

I have taken a few here just from stuff that was just on the TV for the few minutes I was watching - the watch advert looks particularly good - the photos only half do it justice. Its this advert I think I saw on my Dads ZT that had me drooling.

http://imageshack.com/a/img856/3546/q690.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img201/3223/djcv.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img209/826/n5x5.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img547/3594/rt42.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img46/7563/jqqq.jpg

Watch Advert Pics - need to see these

http://imageshack.com/a/img96/3883/vu1v.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img822/8514/sz6b.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img23/6341/x7nd.jpg

 

[ellisdj]

I have just calibrated 3D and i am getting about 85-90% quality of a 2D calibrated image quite incredibly,

This is an eye opener no doubt!!

 

[ellisdj]

Hello ellisdj, yesterday on the "KRP 500A replacement?" thread you said that:

i thought you would need to be side by side to see the difference but you don't. What SW Is getting at is that the 65 is bigger with still stunning PQ - but the ZT Is better, is clearer and cleaner by my memory. I will calibrate the ZT soon, I have just done my 65VT using a new method for me. I have got considerably better PQ than I had last time. I am looking forward to seeing what the ZT can do.

Which here you have just reinforced with:

There are no doubts in my mind now that calibrating this way I have now has given me significantly better picture than what I had last time.

This is from memory of course

It's good that your new method of calibration with your new 65VT65 has given you better results than you got with your previous method on your previous 65VT65. So, the question which has doubtless occurred to you also, is - how would your father's 60ZT65, if you calibrated it with your new method, compare with your second 65VT65 also calibrated with your new method? I ask because you had previously said that the ZT was clearly better than the VT.

Hi Son of SJ.

I calibrated my Fathers ZT yesterday - only 1 calibration not 3D. After calibrating mine and then the ZT things are a lot closer than I thought.

If it was pound for pound i.e. both sets the same size then the ZT would be clearly better. The ZT is better - it calibrates better - only just, it def has deeper blacks that is a really clear/ clean edged image and the movement is better / cleaner I think. Its more like watching the set with IFC on Min. I find it takes a bit of getting used to seeing TV like that - Gel would love it. Obviously that more correct - but I think the better the system the better it will be / easier to watch (I wont go into areas that I believe make a difference)

However in saying that about the ZT I think the bigger screen has the edge for me - its more immersive, easier to watch, its clean enough, the blacks are good enough. 3D calibrated is something special - its really is somehting to behold - its literally as good as good calibrated 2D but in 3D and its big on the 65.

I did get a look at uncalibrated sky 3D on the ZT - I must say that was looking real crisp - with savage potential and I think that is where the ZT really shines is just how clean everything is. Stunning TV

I can see now what at £4k retail WHF only have it 4 stars where £2k gets you the 55VT. Now at £2.8k its a different proposition.

I have seen the 65VT for £2650 amazing price - I think I would still buy that if I had to chooose over again

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Some pics fopr Gel - TV broadcast quality on Virgin is not great - Its very hard to get a decent footbal game shot - not like on Sky.

I have taken a few here just from stuff that was just on the TV for the few minutes I was watching - the watch advert looks particularly good - the photos only half do it justice. Its this advert I think I saw on my Dads ZT that had me drooling.

http://imageshack.com/a/img856/3546/q690.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img201/3223/djcv.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img209/826/n5x5.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img547/3594/rt42.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img46/7563/jqqq.jpg

Watch Advert Pics - need to see these

http://imageshack.com/a/img96/3883/vu1v.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img822/8514/sz6b.jpg

http://imageshack.com/a/img23/6341/x7nd.jpg

Cheers mate - appreciate it. :cheers:

 

[Series1boy]

What does everybody think to this website http://www.imagingscience.com

there is an image of a car that displays an example of before and after calibration. My VT after calibration looks the same as the before image

ellisdj, do you do other peoples TVs and would you be prepared to come up to Yorkshire?

 

[strapped for cash]

The picture quality has gone sick since this calibration

You're an Essex boy through-and-through.

 

[bigboss]

What does everybody think to this website http://www.imagingscience.com

there is an image of a car that displays an example of before and after calibration. My VT after calibration looks the same as the before image

ellisdj, do you do other peoples TVs and would you be prepared to come up to Yorkshire?

Bear in mind you're looking at the image from an uncalibrated laptop monitor.

Also, the camera involved in taking those shots may not have captured the real colour properly.

 

[mr malarky]

What does everybody think to this website http://www.imagingscience.com

there is an image of a car that displays an example of before and after calibration. My VT after calibration looks the same as the before image

ellisdj, do you do other peoples TVs and would you be prepared to come up to Yorkshire?

Have you received your charts/results from the previous calibration, that you could post on the thread?

 

[ellisdj]

Results can be misleading in some ways

Graphically my results for the old and new calibration are similar but they are not in end term results

I dont see how its calibrated wrong, i honestly don't not if done by a pro.

I would come and have a look for you but Yorkshire is not local to me circa 4 plus hours drive each way.

That imaging science site is meant as an advertisement, so its not truely reflective. The VT i think has a softish image, why people say its analogue. You might be used to seeing an image with sharpness added and a lot of contrast that sharpens the image

I assume your still not happy which is a shame and really odd,??

 

[ellisdj]

Results can be misleading in some ways

Graphically my results for the old and new calibration are similar but they are not in end term results

I dont see how its calibrated wrong, i honestly don't not if done by a pro.

I would come and have a look for you but Yorkshire is not local to me circa 4 plus hours drive each way.

That imaging science site is meant as an advertisement, so its not truely reflective. The VT i think has a softish image, why people say its analogue. You might be used to seeing an image with sharpness added and a lot of contrast that sharpens the image

I assume your still not happy which is a shame and really odd,??