A Few Words About A few words about...™ Projector setup (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

(original quote removed by ownership)

I have no doubt that it's different but different doesn't mean that the VHS is correct. What evidence is there that the VHS is how Hitchcock wanted it to look? RAH can speak to it (if he wants to even engage in this nonsense before it gets deleted by the moderators) but I'm assuming that the restoration team looked at prints and did research to get the look that they did.

Also, attacking a restorationist online won't make you feel any better.

I have no problem with proper discussions. Color was derived from a combination of original 1958 35mm dye transfer prints, original costumes and other color samples, as well as input from multiple people on the Hitchcock production team, inclusive of Henry Bumstead and Peggy Robertson.

 

[TravisR]

I have no problem with proper discussions. Color was derived from a combination of original 1958 35mm dye transfer prints, original costumes and other color samples, as well as input from multiple people on the Hitchcock production team, inclusive of Henry Bumstead and Peggy Robertson.

So something more than an old VHS tape then?

 

[Robert Harris]

So something more than an old VHS tape then?

I believe the source of the VHS master, c. 1983-84. was a low-con print, struck from the faded 35/4 duplicate printing negative, used for the theatrical re-issue.

 

[sbjork]

Major useable difference between 5 & 9 is the glass, which aside from a more highly resolved image, allows a bit more illumination.

That noted, Unforgiven did not look proper on the 9.

For what it is worth, the rated contrast doubles from the NX5 to the NX7, then only goes up 25% from the NX7 to the NX9. However much that may mean in real world conditions, it was still enough for me to justify spending the extra $2000 on my RS2000/NX7. The glass, as wonderful as it is, was still not enough to justify spending double that! But barring going top-of-the-line, I would still recommend the 7 over the 5 for contrast alone. I think it is worth the money.

I think that I said this previously, but I got the best results with Unforgiven on my 7 by turning the lamp down to low but the frame-by-frame tone mapping to high, and then stopping the iris down a few notches. That is still hoops that we shouldn't have to jump through, but you do what you have to. I am curious if the new theatre optimizer function further improves the tone mapping for the movie, but I am skeptical because as you say the application of HDR itself may be to blame. But that will still be one of the first discs that I try after I update the new firmware.

 

[Robert Harris]

For what it is worth, the rated contrast doubles from the NX5 to the NX7, then only goes up 25% from the NX7 to the NX9. However much that may mean in real world conditions, it was still enough for me to justify spending the extra $2000 on my RS2000/NX9. The glass, as wonderful as it is, was still not enough to justify spending double that! But barring going top-of-the-line, I would still recommend the 7 over the 5 for contrast alone. I think it is worth the money.

I think that I said this previously, but I got the best results with Unforgiven on my 7 by turning the lamp down to low but the frame-by-frame tone mapping to high, and then stopping the iris down a few notches. That is still hoops that we shouldn't have to jump through, but you do what you have to. I am curious if the new theatre optimizer function further improves the tone mapping for the movie, but I am skeptical because as you say the application of HDR itself may be to blame. But that will still be one of the first discs that I try after I update the new firmware.

Agreed. Discs should just play.

 

[Dave H]

For what it is worth, the rated contrast doubles from the NX5 to the NX7, then only goes up 25% from the NX7 to the NX9. However much that may mean in real world conditions, it was still enough for me to justify spending the extra $2000 on my RS2000/NX9. The glass, as wonderful as it is, was still not enough to justify spending double that! But barring going top-of-the-line, I would still recommend the 7 over the 5 for contrast alone. I think it is worth the money.

With the iris wide open (the way most use for HDR tone mapping) the measured native contrast difference between the N5 and N7 is very small; about 20,000:1 vs 25,000:1. Probably won't be perceptible. (The NX9 is about 30,000:1 with iris fully open). These measurements have been well documented by reputable sources over at AVS and my own personal calibrator. When you start closing the iris down, say for 1080p SDR, then the contrast difference can now become more apparent between the NX5 and NX7. The "double" contrast you speak of is typically measured with both units' iris is fully closed down. Very few people watch these projectors with the iris fully closed...especially for HDR.

 

[sbjork]

I finally pulled the trigger and installed the 3.50 firmware yesterday. I like waiting a couple of months to see if anyone reports bug, and this one is definitely a commitment since it resets any calibration. I still had a spreadsheet with all of my settings, of course, but that took a little time to re-enter. The menus have changed slightly so that slows things down. It is also a little confusing at first how the picture modes work. I watched one UHD and then switched to a Blu-ray but it stayed in HDR mode, and the picture mode button would not show any SDR modes. Turns out that it now only displays SDR modes when playing SDR and HDR modes when playing HDR, but there are new automatic settings for SDR, HDR, HLG, and 3D, but they default to last viewed. So the only way to get it to switch is to go into those settings and make sure to choose the appropriate one. The fact that it adds a default for 3D is a nice addition. But now it auto switches perfectly when changing content and only gives you appropriate options if you press the picture mode button.

I experimented for a bit and it seems to be a winner. Not as much of a game changer as 3.10 was, but definite incremental improvements. I tried some UHDs which previously required manual adjusting of the tone mapping level and most of them now look great with no changes. Even Unforgiven looked better than it ever has, though some of the darkest scenes still look a little washed out. "Darkest" in reference to that movie is a relative thing, of course, but I am thinking of shots like when Munny and The Kid ride back into town in the rain and Munny sends tells the kid to take their shares of the money back to Ned's wife. That shot simply has no highlights of any kind. Unforgiven will simply never work and play perfectly with HDR on anything other than an OLED. But other movies that previously required tweaking are now generally set-and-forget. That is a big plus. I did not yet experiment with turning off the Optimizer and trying the new five levels of adjustment for discs which still are too dark (the new Disney UHDs for the Star Wars films come to mind) but that is on the plate for today.

It also seems like the Optimizer screen size & gain settings may affect SDR content as well. I have usually stopped down the iris a few notches for SDR content, but now the brightness level seems appropriate with it fully open. It may be that they changed the SDR levels overall and that the Optimizer is a coincidence, but I have to play with that a bit more today.

Anyone else try it yet? RAH?

 

[Robert Harris]

I finally pulled the trigger and installed the 3.50 firmware yesterday. I like waiting a couple of months to see if anyone reports bug, and this one is definitely a commitment since it resets any calibration. I still had a spreadsheet with all of my settings, of course, but that took a little time to re-enter. The menus have changed slightly so that slows things down. It is also a little confusing at first how the picture modes work. I watched one UHD and then switched to a Blu-ray but it stayed in HDR mode, and the picture mode button would not show any SDR modes. Turns out that it now only displays SDR modes when playing SDR and HDR modes when playing HDR, but there are new automatic settings for SDR, HDR, HLG, and 3D, but they default to last viewed. So the only way to get it to switch is to go into those settings and make sure to choose the appropriate one. The fact that it adds a default for 3D is a nice addition. But now it auto switches perfectly when changing content and only gives you appropriate options if you press the picture mode button.

I experimented for a bit and it seems to be a winner. Not as much of a game changer as 3.10 was, but definite incremental improvements. I tried some UHDs which previously required manual adjusting of the tone mapping level and most of them now look great with no changes. Even Unforgiven looked better than it ever has, though some of the darkest scenes still look a little washed out. "Darkest" in reference to that movie is a relative thing, of course, but I am thinking of shots like when Munny and The Kid ride back into town in the rain and Munny sends tells the kid to take their shares of the money back to Ned's wife. That shot simply has no highlights of any kind. Unforgiven will simply never work and play perfectly with HDR on anything other than an OLED. But other movies that previously required tweaking are now generally set-and-forget. That is a big plus. I did not yet experiment with turning off the Optimizer and trying the new five levels of adjustment for discs which still are too dark (the new Disney UHDs for the Star Wars films come to mind) but that is on the plate for today.

It also seems like the Optimizer screen size & gain settings may affect SDR content as well. I have usually stopped down the iris a few notches for SDR content, but now the brightness level seems appropriate with it fully open. It may be that they changed the SDR levels overall and that the Optimizer is a coincidence, but I have to play with that a bit more today.

Anyone else try it yet? RAH?

I've discussed with Kevin Miller, and decided, that since it requires a full re-set to allow him to tackle the beast next time he visits.

As to Unforgiven, I have doubts that it can ever look proper on any device.

 

[sbjork]

I've discussed with Kevin Miller, and decided, that since it requires a full re-set to allow him to tackle the beast next time he visits.

As to Unforgiven, I have doubts that it can ever look proper on any device.

It is a major project, no two ways about it. I would have tried to have installing it coincide with a new calibration, but I am far enough along with the life cycle on my lamp that I would rather save the money until I replace it. But re-entering the old one was pretty tedious, especially given some of the menu changes which required hunting around for a few things.

 

[cda1143]

I've discussed with Kevin Miller, and decided, that since it requires a full re-set to allow him to tackle the beast next time he visits.

As to Unforgiven, I have doubts that it can ever look proper on any device.

Robert: Is my memory correct that you felt the Blu-ray version (paired with the 4K disc) looked excellent, or at least far superior to the original Blu-ray release?

Thank you

 

[Robert Harris]

Robert: Is my memory correct that you felt the Blu-ray version (paired with the 4K disc) looked excellent, or at least far superior to the original Blu-ray release?

Thank you

I don’t recall looking at the Blu. Possible, my memory is sometimes faulty on Tuesdays.

 

[cda1143]

Apparently mine is pretty good - at least on Thursdays.

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/co...rgiven-in-4k-uhd-blu-ray.352579/#post-4487906

 

[sbjork]

The new firmware is even more complicated than meets the eye. There are actually three levels to adjust the mapping while still using the Optimizer, not just the five adjustments when you do not. So those darker discs like the Disney ones still work with the Optimizer but you just need to set the level to high.