"4K UHD", "True 4K", "Real 4K", and "Native 4K"

[DavidHir]

Rainbows have never been a problem for me.

I thought it interesting and humorous that the $20k DP XPR 1 chip projector had several people here seeing rainbows. I think Craig was one of them.

Back in the day, my dad and sister each owned a 1080p Samsung DLP RPTV and I never saw a rainbow on those.

[DavidHir]

You should have thrown The Wizard of Oz on ! 

I was looking for that pot of gold but no luck. 

[stanger89]

Good post here and on AVS stanger89.

I see that Ruined his continuing with his deceptions in the UHZ65 thread on AVS and some people who don't seem too swift look like they believe his BS.

He is continuing with his, "CTA ... felt that TI's technology met the requirements." He keeps repeating this. As I've said, I've been in contact with the CTA. They have told me that companies can self certify, so unless somebody has some evidence that the CTA actually looked into this, then it is wrong to keep claiming that the CTA felt that it qualified. As I've also said, the representative for the CTA that I have been discussing this with had never even heard of eShift (or at least didn't know how it worked if he had heard the term).

I still think that TI had a hand in the writing of those "requirements", and made sure they were worded in a way that was advantageous to them.  Further, as you posted above, this is not a scientific standard, it's a marketing standard and companies self-certify.  CTA is a marketing organization, they don't surve customers, they're not like SMPTE trying to establish quality/performance standards, CTA's mission is to assist their members in marketing and selling products.  At least UHD Premium includes has measurable criteria (on that subject, I wonder how UHD Premium defines resolution, I see the stories reference 3840x2160 or greater, but how is that measured?).

Aztar35 is over there claiming, "... the space in between the pixels is being filled with new pixels at the speed of 1/120 second". Clearly he doesn't know how it works, but I'm guessing that is just ignorance.

Most likely, I mean it is filling the gaps, but the gaps are much smaller that the pixels that are filling them, so there's a lot of overlap going on there.

Ruined knows how it works, yet claimed that this post from Aztar35 was correct. Is Ruined really stupid or knows better, but will say just about anything to help his side? I'm guessing the latter. I wouldn't believe a word the guy says.

Ever time I read one of his posts I get the impression he works for Optoma (most likely), Coretronic, or TI.

Sad how on AVS it seems that there are quite a few people who want readers to be tricked by marketing talk or the misrepresentations of some posters about how the technology works.

Honestly, Ruined (while he bugs me) doesn't really bother me that much, what really bugs me is all the people who step in to tell those who are trying to correct his misinformation to get out of the thread.  I completely understand the desire to not have a thread poluted by a largely academic debate, but it's disappointing that no one is calling out Ruined to stop with his misinformation, it's like nobody realizes "we" only post in there to correct his information.  We don't go around just crapping on DLP threads because we don't like DLPs.

[stanger89]

The biggest short coming of the UHD60 I had here wasn't resolution though - the picture looked surprisingly good ( other than the contrast ). It was rainbows, light leakage out the exhaust vent big time, limited lens shift and wonky HDR. And of course no power zoom or focus.

I was really kind of tempted to pick that up from you just to see how it worked.  I just can't fathom how the contrast is acceptable on those, not when it's basically not acceptable on my Planar and it's got about 2-3x the contrast of the UHD60/65.

[stanger89]

Ok, I went and looked at the thread. It doesn't look like many people are responding.

The cynic in me says that they put it in that forum on purpose to bury it.  But really, I take it as more evidence that the majority of the folks who are really excited about 4K DLP are owners of sub $3k DLPs who have no clue what's possible at the UHD65 and especially UHZ65 price points, and they just don't like hearing negative things about their favored technology.  They haven't witnessed DLP's fall from the position of prestige it held about 10 years ago.

[stanger89]

And HDR on a 1000:1 contrast projector can not look good in any way, it is called High Dynamic Range for a reason and it is not possible with 1000:1.

I posted in the Projector vs OLED thread over there, but I just got an LG B7 OLED about a week ago, and I'm more convinced than ever that brightness can't save HDR.  Maybe it's the long seating distance, but I'm just not blown away by the HDR on that B7, the videos I've watched just don't scream HDR to me.  I haven't actually calibrated the HDR on it yet, but the HDR doesn't look that much different than SDR.

I've seen the same thing on my RS600 with a custom curve.  On the flip side, bad contrast, and especially bad black level (not FTB) jumps out at me right away.  My Planar 8150, every time I watch it I think I've got the input levels wrong because the elevated black level looks terrible, but no, that's just all it can do.  I can't imagine watching a projector, even with similar contrast capabilities (like the UHDZ65 supposedly has), but that's 2-3 times brighter.

[darinp]

Most likely, I mean it is filling the gaps, but the gaps are much smaller that the pixels that are filling them, so there's a lot of overlap going on there.

I've exchanged some PMs with Aztar35 and he seems like a nice guy who just didn't understand how the technology worked. I don't believe he was talking about the gaps from having a little less than 100% fill ratio and actually thought real gaps were left in one subframe for the other subframe. I think your post with pictures of the overlap likely helped him understand it better.

Seems like the mods will help Ruined with his misinformation. I don't think it is a coincidence that Ruined didn't correct Aztar35's misunderstanding and instead tried to make it look like what Aztar35 had posted was true.

I also think it is pretty pitiful how many people over there want misinformation to stay uncorrected. I remember the same kind of thing with contrast ratio discussions. Not everybody cares about the truth and it is clear that a whole group of people will attack those posting the truth while defending the deceivers.

--Darin

[stanger89]

I also think it is pretty pitiful how many people over there want misinformation to stay uncorrected. I remember the same kind of thing with contrast ratio discussions. Not everybody cares about the truth and it is clear that a whole group of people will attack those posting the truth while defending the deceivers.

I think it, unfortunately, is more a case of people just don't like hearing bad things about their owned/desired/favored product, and when a debate, especially if it's a distracting one, most folks just don't appear to have the intellectual curiosity to evaluate the debate, they just seem to lash out against whoever's stance appears "negative".

I had a few PM's with Aztar too, he seemed nice enough, but not the technical type.  I wasn't going to question his observations because he's seen it and I haven't.  But I'll definitely question Ruined because he hasn't seen any of the XPR DLPs and hasn't seen 90% of the other machine he talks about.

[Stereodude]

But I'll definitely question Ruined because he hasn't seen any of the XPR DLPs and hasn't seen 90% of the other machine he talks about.

That would definitely suggest he doesn't work for Optoma or Coretronics wouldn't it?

[stanger89]

That would definitely suggest he doesn't work for Optoma or Coretronics wouldn't it?

Well true 

[Stereodude]

Well true 

That of course presumes he's telling the truth about not having seen them.  He sure doesn't seem to have a problem stretching and manipulating it in regards to the facts of DLP tech.

[Stereodude]

BTW, we're probably going to need another one of these threads for 10-bit color real soon. 

[stanger89]

That of course presumes he's telling the truth about not having seen them.  He sure doesn't seem to have a problem stretching and manipulating it in regards to the facts of DLP tech.

FWIW, I kind of doubt he works for Optoma or Coretronic, but the way Optoma can do no wrong according to his posts (while he's OK throwing other XPR manufacturers like Acer under the bus) and his apparent access to not widely available Coretronic information really just has the feel of being an insider.

At the same time, it just seems like he spouts all kinds of things without any first hand knowledge.  Maybe he works for Optoma but in a position where he gets access to hardware....   Who knows.

[ericglo]

You guys are more patient than I am.

I looked at Runt's history and couldn't find anything to give away his affiliation except maybe this.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/1434826-projector-mini-shootout-thread-460.html#post41156801

[Stereodude]

You guys are more patient than I am.

I'm just hoping to get a bite on the color part of this post.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/68-digital-projectors-under-3-000-usd-msrp/2940638-benq-9050-gets-destroyed.html#post55288088