AVS Discussions
  Go Down

BenQ LK990 First Impressions

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #75 on: June 02, 2019, 04:22:17 PM »
Had the LK990 at my house for a few weeks.

Really enjoyed and appreciated the picture it threw.

Ended up sending it back purely because of the amount of RBE that I personally experienced.

I had my brother come over and tested him to see if he saw the RBE or found it distracting, and he was only able to see it when I pointed out how to force it, or where to look for it. But for me it was enough to send it back.

Am trying out a HT9060 2 weeks from now, as I was really quite fond of the qualities of the 990 image in terms of crisp, bright, sharp. Am told the 9060 will throw a very similar image, and that with the 5x color wheel speed, RBE should be eliminated in my case. Even if it is reduced a bit, I should be more than happy with the 9060.

Also I should mention, that to me personally, the smart eco dimming on the 990 was not something that A. I found necessary for contrast/dark performance. B. Was more distracting than helpful in some scenes.  In some scenes the brightness would switch back and forth, like a light switch as the perspective of the camera changed, which was infinitely more distracting than the lesser dark levels of the projector in Normal mode.

But I found Normal mode contrast/darkness levels to be more than acceptable, due to the other qualities of the image, which I greatly appreciated.

Will post my comparisons once I get back from vacation next tuesday or possibly the weekend after.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 04:27:31 PM by Maestrosc »

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #76 on: June 02, 2019, 07:03:12 PM »
RBE on the HT9060 should be reduced, not eliminated. It will resemble what a high quality single chip DLP unit with an 6x RGB/RGB color wheel can do. From what I've heard, with this new XPR technology and DMD, TI have locked the color flashing to 6x, even when you're using an LED light source.

The only single chip DLP units I've personally seen that eliminated it completely were the first generation .95" 1080p DC3/DC4 DMD LED projectors that used the Osram RAPCUR LED controller combined with the Phlatlight PT-120 LEDs. These projectors include the Runco Q750i, Sim2 Mico60, Vivitek H9080FD and the TruVue Vango. This combination allowed for an equivalent color wheel speed of 18x. 

Have you had the opportunity to test out any Sony or JVC models in your theater? Near the street price of the HT9060, I'd recommend taking a look at the JVC DLA-RS1000. It should be close in lumens, resolution and color characteristics but with much better contrast performance over the BenQ. I've done my fair share of projector shootouts and home theater meetups between DLP and LCoS projectors over the last 10 years and there's never been a DLP unit that everyone preferred. If you haven't seen a JVC, you owe it to yourself to at least see one in your theater to see what all the fuss is about. If you can swing it, the RS2000 is a much better option with the increase in contrast and color saturation performance over the RS1000.
A/V Reviewer
Home Theater Review
My Equipment

AVSCraig

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #77 on: June 03, 2019, 01:45:54 PM »
RBE on the HT9060 should be reduced, not eliminated. It will resemble what a high quality single chip DLP unit with an 6x RGB/RGB color wheel can do. From what I've heard, with this new XPR technology and DMD, TI have locked the color flashing to 6x, even when you're using an LED light source.

The only single chip DLP units I've personally seen that eliminated it completely were the first generation .95" 1080p DC3/DC4 DMD LED projectors that used the Osram RAPCUR LED controller combined with the Phlatlight PT-120 LEDs. These projectors include the Runco Q750i, Sim2 Mico60, Vivitek H9080FD and the TruVue Vango. This combination allowed for an equivalent color wheel speed of 18x.

Have you had the opportunity to test out any Sony or JVC models in your theater? Near the street price of the HT9060, I'd recommend taking a look at the JVC DLA-RS1000. It should be close in lumens, resolution and color characteristics but with much better contrast performance over the BenQ. I've done my fair share of projector shootouts and home theater meetups between DLP and LCoS projectors over the last 10 years and there's never been a DLP unit that everyone preferred. If you haven't seen a JVC, you owe it to yourself to at least see one in your theater to see what all the fuss is about. If you can swing it, the RS2000 is a much better option with the increase in contrast and color saturation performance over the RS1000.

Interesting. I rarely saw RBE back in the day. On my Digital Projection dVision 1080p single chip DLP projector I never saw it. Either it's more pronounced now on these current faux 4K DLP chips, or my brain adapted to 3 chip and I can't go back. :-X

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #78 on: June 04, 2019, 06:43:18 PM »
Some people see it and others don't. On the LK990 it's much worse than most of the other single chip DLP units I've seen. This makes sense when you realize the LK990 isn't a home theater projector so an effort to reduce this artifact wasn't factored in to the design. It's also extremely bright which tends to exacerbate the issue. 

The best single chip color wheel based projector I've personally seen was the Planar PD8150. Very, very little RBE. The Marantz single chip units were pretty good too.
A/V Reviewer
Home Theater Review
My Equipment

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #79 on: June 15, 2019, 02:33:06 AM »
Is Woofer in this forum?  Has he received the LK990 yet?  If so I have some newer settings to try. They had to be totally redone because I updated the FW on the UB820, which added many traits from the UB9000 and totally changed the tone mapping.

BTW, those comments “over there” are absolute lies and rubbish!  Kinda funny that now you can feel like you can post anything there no matter how much BS it is because now nobody is going to stand up and fight the misinformation and lies.

I answered every single one of the lying statements there previously yet the same offenders are still lying out their teeth when they know I’ve already covered it and replied and corrected them.

I’m going to come here and do a straight question and answer based on the false statements there.  It’s unbelievable how much is wrong. But I guess with no checks and balances that’s just what that place has turned into.

Javs

  • *****
  • 116
Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #80 on: June 15, 2019, 04:18:05 AM »
Is Woofer in this forum?  Has he received the LK990 yet?  If so I have some newer settings to try. They had to be totally redone because I updated the FW on the UB820, which added many traits from the UB9000 and totally changed the tone mapping.

BTW, those comments “over there” are absolute lies and rubbish!  Kinda funny that now you can feel like you can post anything there no matter how much BS it is because now nobody is going to stand up and fight the misinformation and lies.

I answered every single one of the lying statements there previously yet the same offenders are still lying out their teeth when they know I’ve already covered it and replied and corrected them.

I’m going to come here and do a straight question and answer based on the false statements there.  It’s unbelievable how much is wrong. But I guess with no checks and balances that’s just what that place has turned into.

How exciting! It should be HEAPS better than MadVR!!

https://i.imgur.com/MKEpWUR.gif
BenQ LK990 First Impressions
JVC X9500 (RS620) | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | Emotiva 5175 | Rotel RMB-1555B | iNuke 3000DSP | Javelin Audio 7.4.2 System

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #81 on: June 15, 2019, 04:27:36 AM »
How exciting! It should be HEAPS better than MadVR!!

https://i.imgur.com/MKEpWUR.gif
BenQ LK990 First Impressions

Since when is this a contest with MadVR?  That explains it all actually. This is about what makes the LK work best, and HDR to SDR ain’t it. So who’s the one taking this all personally Javs?

Javs

  • *****
  • 116
Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #82 on: June 15, 2019, 04:34:06 AM »
Since when is this a contest with MadVR?  That explains it all actually. This is about what makes the LK work best, and HDR to SDR ain’t it. So who’s the one taking this all personally Javs?

Its not about MadVR, but Woofer uses it now exclusively.

Dylan was using it back when he looked at the LK, twice, and you said both times he did it wrong... I am curious why you think your way is THE way to make the LK work best?
« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 04:40:19 AM by Javs »
JVC X9500 (RS620) | Marantz AV7702 MkII | Emotiva XPA-7 | Emotiva 5175 | Rotel RMB-1555B | iNuke 3000DSP | Javelin Audio 7.4.2 System

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #83 on: June 15, 2019, 07:04:26 AM »
Since when is this a contest with MadVR?  That explains it all actually. This is about what makes the LK work best, and HDR to SDR ain’t it. So who’s the one taking this all personally Javs?
With respect, you yourself kinda have made it a contest with MadVR by repeatedly stating that the best possible video performance is achieved only by using your settings. Where others are using MadVR to carry out the HDR processing because they consider that this delivers the best video performance. Other folks make use of a Lumagen PRO or a Panasonic Blu-Ray player similarly, although IMO these don't deliver as good performance as MadVR.

You even state that "HDR to SDR ain’t it" which makes me wonder whether you really understand how HDR actually works. The fact of the matter is that the resultant image that is displayed when using an external device to carry out the HDR processing, including tone-mapping, is in fact HDR not SDR. There is no downconverting to SDR. Wherein, the reason why you set the output that is fed to the projector to SDR BT2020 is because the HDR processing has already been carried out; so the projected image is in fact HDR.

And in fact there are very good scientific reasons why it is advantageous to carry out the HDR processing including tone-mapping earlier in the video chain, because this means that the video display device can be calibrated to flat 2.4 gamma and thereby circumvent any and all limitations with respect to whichever video display device regards calibrating HDR, which quite frankly is something nobody ideally should be having to do in the first place.

Please can you kindly explain the reasons why you believe your settings and feeding an HDR video signal to the projector achieves superior video performance as compared with using MadVR, a Lumagen PRO, or a Pansonic Blu-Ray player to carry out the HDR video processing? Wherein, it should be noted that both MadVR and Lumagen PRO carry out frame-by-frame tone-mapping with HDR10 content akin to Dolby Vision, thereby fixing all the issues and problems associated with HDR10 encoded media. So why are your settings and method, which is restricted to using static metadata (which is sometimes corrupt, broken, or missing) and requires calibrating the projector for HDR, better exactly? :-\




« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 07:10:34 AM by ARROW-AV »

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #84 on: June 15, 2019, 10:25:40 AM »
Dave, if you want to continue discussing this here, watch who you're calling a liar. You aren't going to get away with the ad hominem attacks here like you did on the other forum so keep the discussion civil. I think it's fair to say that Mike and Craig have been especially patient with your shenanigans as it is. 
A/V Reviewer
Home Theater Review
My Equipment

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #85 on: June 15, 2019, 10:36:52 AM »
Its not about MadVR, but Woofer uses it now exclusively.

Dylan was using it back when he looked at the LK, twice, and you said both times he did it wrong... I am curious why you think your way is THE way to make the LK work best?


Between my quick-cal and using madVR (or even the tonemapping on the UB820) made a noticeable positive difference in image quality over the settings Dave recommended us to use at the time. Both of us in the room agreed. The image just looked more natural. We both thought Dave's settings gave the image a far too vibrant and overcooked appearance. Some may prefer this look, but these settings rendered the image far from how it was mastered. With madVR, even though were tone mapping, due to the mathematical nature of how the software works, we're at least trying to mitigate as many deficiencies as possible as we change the pixel information. I didn't get this sense when using Dave's settings because of how different the image appeared. Dave's settings appear to try and recreate what an average Joe consumer might assume HDR is supposed to look like, vibrant and overly contrasty. Maybe his new settings lessen this effect? As an example of what we were seeing, Kris's photos here show it off pretty well:

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-digital-hi-end-projectors-3-000-usd-msrp/3049764-benq-ht9060-lk990-depth-reviews-comparison-thread-32.html#post58098746
« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 01:36:15 PM by Dylan Seeger »
A/V Reviewer
Home Theater Review
My Equipment

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #86 on: June 15, 2019, 11:33:24 AM »
Dave's settings cannot in any way shape or form come close to giving you the same performance as a Panasonic, Lumagen or MadVR. Let's look at this from the most basic imaging science approach:

Dave is using nothing but the projector settings. For the BenQ 970 (I haven't seen the 990, but I imagine it is similar) you can set the gamma to a power law, in which he choses 2.8, but that is ALL you can do. There is no parametric setting to adjust gamma along the luminance levels. If he is trying to do a PQ calibration (which he stated before he is) then that gamma curve would look like an S curve, which you are not going to get. He is most likely trying to emulate this with the contrast/brightness controls, but that is going to kill the white and black point, which is what these controls are for. With any of the other solutions the S-Curve is not only taken care of in the source device, it is changed on a title by title or frame by frame basis. 

Then there is color. He wants to feed 2020 color in, but these are projectors that can't even do full 709. So anything beyond what the projector is capable of is clipped and layered on top of itself. You also have to do major adjustments of color/tint to realign the gamut to what 2020 is, which completely kills your linearity even inside the gamut you can do. This causes clear issues with greens, reds and yellows. By converting the matrix to 2020 you lose NOTHING in terms of what you would have had before, but you are accurately taking the 2020 container and mapping it to the display's gamut potential. This would nearly eliminate clipping (you're still not getting the full 709 gamut) and improve linearity inside your gamut. 

The thing that is so frustrating about Dave's argument is that it is like he doesn't even understand his own argument. He is trying to do the exact same things these devices will already do (create a tone map and remap color), but they will do it far better. And this is just for the HDR side of things. We are not even talking about the limitations of contrast and its effects. 

I'm not going to get in to all the other arguments about people using or not using the settings properly and all that other nonsense. Reading that thread through speaks volumes enough. If you couple the 970 with an outboard device you can get a decent HDR image out of it. It is extremely bright and very sharp, and would be a good fit for someone looking for those qualities in a solid state device for their room on a budget. The 9060 gives you better color coverage and nearly eliminates RBE completely, but it has issues with HDR tone mapping and creates a difficult proposition for using an outboard device to do the tone mapping for you. For SDR I like the 9060 better than the 970, but it isn't nearly as bright so that may be an issue depending on your room needs. Again, I haven't seen a 990. 
Technical Editor/Writer
Sound and Vision

Pro Calibration, Consulting and Education: www.deepdiveav.com

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #87 on: June 15, 2019, 06:07:30 PM »
Its not about MadVR, but Woofer uses it now exclusively.

Dylan was using it back when he looked at the LK, twice, and you said both times he did it wrong... I am curious why you think your way is THE way to make the LK work best?

As I’ve said countless times on AVSF, it’s not about the merits of MadVR, Lumagen, et al. It’s about the shortcomings of the LKs that you yourself, myself and others like Kris and Dylan have pointed out.

On the LK970, the shortcoming is it doesn’t do HDR BT2020/P3 natively, so you first have to resort to extreme measures to realign the incoming native HDR signal to display properly (as Kris alludes to in his reply above).  Then once it’s really close you then do an HDR PQ calibration to get it as right and close to spec as possible. (Mainly CMS and greyscale). If it looks too blown out and overcooked as some mentioned, and as I have seen before also, then you can easily back down some of the settings like contrast and color and dial it in to spec and/or as you like. That seems to be the step everyone is missing here on the LK970. Everyone just throws in my base settings and looks at it in their system and then thinks that’s the way it is in its final version, but nothing could be further from the truth. I have always said that those settings are only a baseline to start with so the HDR signal appears semi-normal, just as if you sent native HDR into an HDR projector for the first time that does support it natively. And then of course what you would do in that case is start a calibration process, which is what I am saying to do in this case as well after inputting my base settings to prepare the LK970 to receive a native HDR input.  You all know how much better it can look once the calibration is done on any display, and that is all I am saying to do here and what seems to have been missed and not done by those who’ve tried. You also have to go back and forth over and over again, literally changing one or two clicks on settings and you can see it slowly starting to snap into place and wow you, getting rid of the have and milky greys that have been reported and that I’ve also seen myself many times, but had to keep working it to alleviate it. It takes many hours of patience initially but you get the hang of changing what setting does to what you see and measure, so it becomes easier the more times you do it. All I was ever saying was what was reported was wrong and if you keep at it then it will be eventually rectified. Too many gave up too early and then said it couldn’t be done, when in fact it could and has been by me and others.

On the LK990, it is because as we all agree the stock HDR mode, tone map and curves aren’t ideal, especially when combined with the issues of it color shifting with dynamic dimming and with brilliant color on.  The big fact of why I use HDR mode though is exactly as Javs and I and everyone has pointed out, that you are locked into the HDR PQ gamma curve and you can’t change picture modes and you can’t get BT2020 color when using an SDR mode. These are all shortcomings of the LK990 projector, not anything to do with madVR or a Lumagen or any other external tone mapping source, so this is why I say this has nothing to do with comparing the virtues of each, which you all are apparently stuck on. I am sure if MadVR was (or could be?) set to output HDR while only performing dynamic per scene tone mapping of luminance only instead of also mapping HDR to SDR, that it would be superior to what I do with the UB820 only. I have asked Javs this many times. This is NOT in dispute, so let’s please drop that argument.

The difference between what I am doing and you are doing is that I choose to stay in HDR mode and not tone map HDR to SDR so I can take advantage of the BT2020 color and the parameters engineered into the LK990 for its PQ gamma curve  and then work with it and tailor it to work as properly as possible, which is very similar to how everyone used to do it with other custom gamma curves that were better than what the stock gamma curve/mode gave you, like gamma D on the earlier JVC projectors.  Same concept here.

I know what you are all saying and I totally agree with the fact that dynamic per scene dimming is best, but as I have already stated many times over and over again, the solution I am talking about now is simply for people who do not want to or have the inclination to either build a home theater PC with madVR or don’t have the funds to buy an expensive Lumagen Radiance Pro.  I have also said numerous times that when combined with the SmartEco dynamic dimming of the projector along with the per disc dynamic dimming of the UB820, in combination, this does effectively almost the same thing.

Here is a simple question:
Are the SDR and HDR modes and their associated firmware in HDR capable displays engineered differently in how they respond and react to each given signal that’s expected when each mode is chosen for a particular use case when receiving each’s expected signal when chosen?  In the LKs’ case, this would be its SmartEco dimming and gamma manipulation, Brilliant Color, gamma mode, dynamic range, Automatic Power Control dimming, Color and phosphor wheel reaction, Full shutoff of laser, etc.

If the answer is yes, then that’s my answer to you all in why I choose to use HDR signals into the LKs (customized to be optimal) and not send HDR tone mapped to SDR. The SDR mode and how it was designed and engineered for the LKs is inferior and reacts quite differently (its dimming, Brilliant Color, gamma manipulation in SmartEco, color gamut, gamma curves used, etc.) than what was designed and engineered for the HDR mode. Plain as that. I have found through many hours of testing that I can get a better image when manipulating HDR on these than I can trying to do the same manipulation while in an SDR mode on the LKs. I have on many occasions tried setting it to HDR to SDR Tone mapping and never ever was able to get out of these in that mode what I could while maintaining an HDR input signal.

As you can hopefully see now, this is not a slight or diss on madVR, Lumagen or even the UB820/9000.  This is about the shortcomings of the LKs, plain and simple, so we need to move past this thought process that is clearly shown here that I am somehow dissing those solutions when I am not. I am actually dissing the LK990 and LK970 for not doing that part properly, which is what predicates and causes my use of those crazy settings.  The whole reason I feel it is well worth it in the end is because when you do go through the trouble to get it just right, the image is absolutely stunning and I stick by that 100%!

« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 06:09:44 PM by HarperVision »

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #88 on: June 15, 2019, 06:33:50 PM »


On the LK970, the shortcoming is it doesn’t do HDR BT2020/P3 natively, so you first have to resort to extreme measures to realign the incoming native HDR signal to display properly (as Kris alludes to in his reply above).  Then once it’s really close you then do an HDR PQ calibration to get it as right and close to spec as possible. (Mainly CMS and greyscale). If it looks too blown out and overcooked as some mentioned, and as I have seen before also, then you can easily back down some of the settings like contrast and color and dial it in to spec and/or as you like. That seems to be the step everyone is missing here on the LK970. Everyone just throws in my base settings and looks at it in their system and then thinks that’s the way it is in its final version, but nothing could be further from the truth. I have always said that those settings are only a baseline to start with so the HDR signal appears semi-normal, just as if you sent native HDR into an HDR projector for the first time that does support it natively. And then of course what you would do in that case is start a calibration process, which is what I am saying to do in this case as well after inputting my base settings to prepare the LK970 to receive a native HDR input.  You all know how much better it can look once the calibration is done on any display, and that is all I am saying to do here and what seems to have been missed and not done by those who’ve tried. You also have to go back and forth over and over again, literally changing one or two clicks on settings and you can see it slowly starting to snap into place and wow you, getting rid of the have and milky greys that have been reported and that I’ve also seen myself many times, but had to keep working it to alleviate it. It takes many hours of patience initially but you get the hang of changing what setting does to what you see and measure, so it becomes easier the more times you do it. All I was ever saying was what was reported was wrong and if you keep at it then it will be eventually rectified. Too many gave up too early and then said it couldn’t be done, when in fact it could and has been by me and others.

There is no PQ standard for projectors. If you calibrate to PQ, you can only calibrate to ONE MaxCLL and hope that covers everything, which it does not. When I asked about getting your settings from you the very first time, after you asked if I'd try them, the very next post from me was asking specifically if you had a calibration target that was associated with those settings. You never responded. You didn't start attacking the calibration stuff until after I just went ahead and tried the settings (which someone else provided) and showed that the results didn't look good. I even explained in the post the reason they wouldn't look good. Changing the contrast setting is only changing the white point and ruining the weak contrast performance even more. And if people can afford to buy a LK970 (which is all I'm referring to, because that is all I've tested) buying something like the Panasonic 820 should not be a stretch. They are going to have to buy a HD Fury box using your settings anyways, so may as well just put that money toward a Panasonic instead and get rid of the "tweaking" that would be required for every title since you're developing a single tone map anyways. What you are trying to achieve and what Panasonic is actually doing are the same thing, they are just doing it within actual standards so they don't have to hunt and peck for some setting that may make the image look right if you're lucky, and then have to start again with the next title. Adjusting color/tint/contrast/brightness on a title by title basis should be the LAST thing you should have to do based on what those settings actually do.

The biggest issue I had with you Dave is your insistence on laying blame on all others but yourself when it came to evaluating these projectors. I got the 970 and asked specifically for your settings. You said you would get them. Then you didn't. Then someone else found some that you had posted before and you said those should work but that you may have newer ones, which you didn't provide. I asked about calibration and you didn't respond. Then later you backtracked all this and said I didn't calibrate, which I asked you about, and that those settings weren't right, but didn't provide the ones that supposedly were. Then you said you've posted settings a bunch of times, then you email Mike and say that your settings were only in some email. Every single time there is another excuse and what amounts to lies about what you have or have not posted. But in all those endless amounts of posts you never thought to just clear the air and ACTUALLY POST THE SETTINGS YOU THINK SHOULD BE USED. It took endless arguing to even get your calibration target out, and I chimed right in and said why calibrating to PQ makes zero sense in this case. Plus you can't adjust gamma on these projectors anyway, as I mentioned in the post above.

Ultimately it doesn't matter now on my end. The LK970 is gone and I have zero desire to see a 990. DLP as a technology has to make some major advancements to get my personal interest and these projectors need to work out their massive shortcomings before I'm inclined to look at them again.



Here is a simple question:
Are the SDR and HDR modes and their associated firmware in HDR capable displays engineered differently in how they respond and react to each given signal that’s expected when each mode is chosen for a particular use case when receiving each’s expected signal when chosen?  In the LKs’ case, this would be its SmartEco dimming and gamma manipulation, Brilliant Color, gamma mode, dynamic range, Automatic Power Control dimming, Color and phosphor wheel reaction, Full shutoff of laser, etc.

They are not unless you are feeding in a signal that locks out certain controls. So if you are outputting SDR2020 or SDR709, you should have full access to the other settings. This is not the case with the 9060, but it worked fine with the 970.


Technical Editor/Writer
Sound and Vision

Pro Calibration, Consulting and Education: www.deepdiveav.com

Re: BenQ LK990 First Impressions
« Reply #89 on: June 18, 2019, 06:30:36 PM »
With respect, you yourself kinda have made it a contest with MadVR by repeatedly stating that the best possible video performance is achieved only by using your settings. Where others are using MadVR to carry out the HDR processing because they consider that this delivers the best video performance. Other folks make use of a Lumagen PRO or a Panasonic Blu-Ray player similarly, although IMO these don't deliver as good performance as MadVR.

You even state that "HDR to SDR ain’t it" which makes me wonder whether you really understand how HDR actually works. The fact of the matter is that the resultant image that is displayed when using an external device to carry out the HDR processing, including tone-mapping, is in fact HDR not SDR. There is no downconverting to SDR. Wherein, the reason why you set the output that is fed to the projector to SDR BT2020 is because the HDR processing has already been carried out; so the projected image is in fact HDR.

And in fact there are very good scientific reasons why it is advantageous to carry out the HDR processing including tone-mapping earlier in the video chain, because this means that the video display device can be calibrated to flat 2.4 gamma and thereby circumvent any and all limitations with respect to whichever video display device regards calibrating HDR, which quite frankly is something nobody ideally should be having to do in the first place.

Please can you kindly explain the reasons why you believe your settings and feeding an HDR video signal to the projector achieves superior video performance as compared with using MadVR, a Lumagen PRO, or a Pansonic Blu-Ray player to carry out the HDR video processing? Wherein, it should be noted that both MadVR and Lumagen PRO carry out frame-by-frame tone-mapping with HDR10 content akin to Dolby Vision, thereby fixing all the issues and problems associated with HDR10 encoded media. So why are your settings and method, which is restricted to using static metadata (which is sometimes corrupt, broken, or missing) and requires calibrating the projector for HDR, better exactly? :-\

See my reply to Javs for a more detailed response.

Believe me, I know what “HDR” is. You guys wonder why I get so upset and take it personal when you say such demeaning things as that to me, like I don’t even know the basics of all this. I mean come on really?  Can we just get past that please?  Ask me real questions without demeaning me, my abilities and my knowledge and maybe we would get somewhere.

As I said in the previous reply, it’s not about MadVR, Lumagen etc. it’s about the LK990’s inabilities and not being able to do SDR BT2020 amongst other things. I’ve noticed in several attempts that to get the best image from the LK990 with its limitations is to send it HDR BT2020 and then tweak the signal from there so you can maintain the BT2020 color space and overall better gamma and image performance.

I am using a Panasonic UB820, and have stated such numerous times and the reasons why for this. I also have a Lumagen Radiance Pro and recently got a Panamorph Paladin.

  Go Up
 

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2026, SimplePortal