Is This a Good Test For Proper Contrast & Brightness Settings?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Doug_L, Aug 29, 2001.

  1. Doug_L

    Doug_L Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2000
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    0
    As I read people's posts about the difficulty of calibrating using VE and AVIA, and most people write things to the effect of either "It's dead on", or "How do I know when it's blooming" it occurs to me that if we referred to specific scenes in movies we might get somewhere. If we used real-life scenes where we can definitively say something to the effect of "If you can't see this, then your set it not right", or even "You should not see this..." I think for many (myself included) this might be quite useful.
    As far as shadow detail goes I used to think Robert DeNiro hiding in a dark corner in "Heat" was as good a test as any. I have a new one that should be even more definitive.
    Just watched "The Killing Fields" the other night (it was damn good, but not truly great - a little too 80's for my taste). There's a shot early on which is totally backlit by the sunset. In fact, it's the same shot they use for the cover art http://us.imdb.com/ImageView?u=http%...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg (note: in the movie Sam Waterston is backlit too. They make his visible on the poster). Even with the extreme backlighting, I can just make out figures and shapes amongst the shadows on the left (ie: a person's leg moving in front of the boat, etc.).
    I don't know that my TV (direct view CRT) is properly calibrated. I do know that I've used VE, and I think it looks pretty good (thus the problem). I would really love it if somebody with a properly calibrated system (ISF'd, if possible) could check out this scene and let me know what should, or should not be visible.
    Also, as this is a high APL image, I would imagine that this is a good real-life test for a TV's ability to hold black at black, rather than just eyeballing some strips on a background.
    Hope everybody checks out the scene, and the movie. Looking forward to everyone's results.
     
  2. John David Rage

    Joined:
    May 11, 2001
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doing the testing for contrast/black level in this manner is a good idea, we also have to keep in mind that the movie you mention for the testing , it's the one that they actually have. I got a question as well, chapter 12 in "Pitch Black" when the boy fallows Riddick who is hidden in the shadows. They spot a creature eating a smaller creature. The creature notices the boy and let's out these "things" out of it's hand. After this there is a shot where it shows the creature doing this with it's right hand and his ontop of something, now , having proper black level, how mutch of this creature is visible and can we clearly see what he is standing and see the "face" ...On my sony wega 27inch set, I don't see his legs standing on something, I did when I had the high APL set but then I got the "dark bar" witch the dvd makes in the squeeze process show up plus the original bars in the "unscanned" part of the picture. I can't tolerate this. So when I set it back to a low APL pattern, I didn't see too mutch in the "shadows" , also have to remember that a smaller crt direct view like mine, 27inch things are smaller in the background, so it will come through better on a RPTV over 40 inches.
     

Share This Page